ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2023
Linking cardiac and extracardiac sarcoidosis and their clinical outcome:
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo clarify the link between cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) and extra-CS (ECS) in systemic CS (SCS) patients in terms of extent and clinical outcome by serial FDG-PET/CT.
methodsThirty-five SCS patients treated for > 2 years were enrolled in this study. In the overall analysis, patient-based comparisons of the complete resolution (CR) and recurrence rate between CS and ECS lesions were performed. Then, subgroup analyses were performed according to the extent (mono- vs. multi-organ ECS group) and clinical outcome (stable vs. unstable ECS group) of ECS. Pre-treatment cardiac FDG uptake was compared between the mono- and multi-organ ECS groups. The rates of CR, recurrence, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe CR rate was significantly higher in CS than ECS lesions [77.1% (27/35) vs. 48.5% (17/35), p = 0.01], whereas recurrence rates were similar between CS and ECS [40.7% (11/27) vs. 58.8% (10/17)]. Both the mono- and multi-organ ECS groups showed similar SUV
conclusionsCS lesions respond to treatment better than ECS lesions, and the extent and clinical outcome of ECS lesion are not linked with those of CS lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37119390What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.