Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35526220›Full record

ReviewMedical physics2022

Nuclear-medicine probes: Where we are and where we are going.

Andrea Gonzalez-Montoro, Cesar David Vera-Donoso, Georgios Konstantinou, Pablo Sopena, Manolo Martinez, Juan Bautista Ortiz, Montserrat Carles, Jose Maria Benlloch, Antonio Javier Gonzalez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Design and Evaluation of a Portable Pinhole SPECT System forDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Andrea Gonzalez-MontoroInstituto de Instrumentación para Imagen Molecular (I3M), Centro Mixto CSIC Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.
Cesar David Vera-DonosoUrology Department, La Fe Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Georgios KonstantinouMultiwave Metacrystal S.A., Geneva, Switzerland.
Pablo SopenaServicio de Medicina Nuclear, Área clínica de Imagen Médica, La Fe Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Manolo MartinezUrology Department, La Fe Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Juan Bautista OrtizUrology Department, La Fe Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Montserrat CarlesBiomedical Imaging Research Group, La Fe Hospital, Valencia, Spain.
Jose Maria BenllochInstituto de Instrumentación para Imagen Molecular (I3M), Centro Mixto CSIC Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.
Antonio Javier GonzalezInstituto de Instrumentación para Imagen Molecular (I3M), Centro Mixto CSIC Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.

Funding

Conselleria de Cultura, Educación y Ciencia, Generalitat Valenciana VALi+d ProgramFundación para la Investigación del Hospital Universitari La Fe IIS-F-PG-22-02GVA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nuclear medicine probes turned into the key for the identification and precise location of sentinel lymph nodes and other occult lesions (i.e., tumors) by using the systemic administration of radiotracers. Intraoperative nuclear probes are key in the surgical management of some malignancies as well as in the determination of positive surgical margins, thus reducing the extent and potential surgery morbidity. Depending on their application, nuclear probes are classified into two main categories, namely, counting and imaging. Although counting probes present a simple design, are handheld (to be moved rapidly), and provide only acoustic signals when detecting radiation, imaging probes, also known as cameras, are more hardware-complex and also able to provide images but at the cost of an increased intervention time as displacing the camera has to be done slowly. This review article begins with an introductory section to highlight the relevance of nuclear-based probes and their components as well as the main differences between ionization- (semiconductor) and scintillation-based probes. Then, the most significant performance parameters of the probe are reviewed (i.e., sensitivity, contrast, count rate capabilities, shielding, energy, and spatial resolution), as well as the different types of probes based on the target radiation nature, namely: gamma (γ), beta (β) (positron and electron), and Cherenkov. Various available intraoperative nuclear probes are finally compared in terms of performance to discuss the state-of-the-art of nuclear medicine probes. The manuscript concludes by discussing the ideal probe design and the aspects to be considered when selecting nuclear-medicine probes.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsNuclear MedicineSentinel Lymph NodeGamma RaysHumansRadionuclide Imagingintraoperative instrumentsnuclear medicinenuclear probesradiation detectors

Identifiers

PMID35526220
PMCPMC9545507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.