ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2023
A novel objective method for discriminating pathological and physiological colorectal uptake in the lower abdominal region using whole-body dynamic
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. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether the center-of-mass shift distance (CMSD) analysis on whole-body dynamic positron emission tomography (WBD-PET) with continuous bed motion is an objective index for discriminating pathological and physiological uptake in the lower abdominal colon.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the CMSD in 39 patients who underwent delayed imaging to detect incidental focal uptake that was difficult to determine as pathological and physiological on a conventional early-PET (early) image reconstructed by 5-phase WBD-PET images. The CMSD between each phase of WBD-PET images and between conventional early and delayed (two-phase) PET images were classified into pathological and physiological uptake groups based on endoscopic histology or other imaging diagnostics. The diagnostic performance of CMSD analysis on WBD-PET images was evaluated by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis and compared to that of two-phase PET images.
resultsA total of 66 incidental focal uptake detected early image were classified into 19 and 47 pathological and physiological uptake groups, respectively. The CMSD on WBD-PET and two-phase PET images in the pathological uptake group was significantly lower than that in the physiological uptake group (p < 0.01), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in CMSD analysis on WBD-PET images at the optimal cutoff of 5.2 mm estimated by the Youden index were 94.7%, 89.4%, and 89.4%, respectively, which were not significantly different (p = 0.74) from those of two-phase PET images.
conclusionsThe CMSD analysis on WBD-PET was useful in discriminating pathological and physiological colorectal uptake in the lower abdominal region, and its diagnostic performance was comparable to that of two-phase PET images. We suggested that CMSD analysis on WBD-PET images would be a novel objective method to omit unnecessary additional delayed imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.