Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37361199›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2023

Intraoperative Molecular Positron Emission Tomography Imaging for Intraoperative Assessment of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens.

Christopher Darr, Pedro Fragoso Costa, Theresa Kahl, Alexandros Moraitis, Jenna Engel, Mulham Al-Nader, Henning Reis, Jens Köllermann, Claudia Kesch, Ulrich Krafft and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Nuclear medicine in the operating room: present and future.The British journal of radiology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

18 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher DarrDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Pedro Fragoso CostaDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Theresa KahlDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Alexandros MoraitisDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Jenna EngelDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Mulham Al-NaderDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Henning ReisDepartment of Pathology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Jens KöllermannDepartment of Pathology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Claudia KeschDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Ulrich KrafftDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Tobias MaurerMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Daniel KöhlerDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Susanne KlutmannDepartment for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Fabian FalkenbachMartini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Jens KleesiekInstitute of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Wolfgang P FendlerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Boris A HadaschikDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Ken HerrmannDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Essen University Hospital · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this prospective two-center feasibility study, we evaluate the diagnostic value of intraoperative ex vivo specimenPET/CT imaging of radical prostatectomy (RP) and lymphadenectomy specimens. Ten patients with high-risk prostate cancer underwent clinical prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) preoperatively on the day of surgery. Six patients received Patient summary: In this report, we examined prostatectomy and lymphadenectomy specimens for suspicious positron emission tomography (PET) signals after preoperative tracer injection. It was found that in all cases, a good signal could be visualized, with a promising correlation of surface assessment compared with histopathology. We conclude that specimenPET imaging is feasible and may help improve oncological outcomes in the future.

Indexed as

Prostate cancerProstate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomographyRadical prostatectomySpecimenPET/CT

Identifiers

PMID37361199
PMCPMC10285557
OpenAlexW4380924917

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.