ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2025
Diagnostic value of FDG PET/CT in determining the etiology of pericardial effusion.
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the imaging characteristics of FDG PET/CT in pericardial effusions from various etiologies and evaluate its diagnostic utility for differentiating these etiologies.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 patients who underwent FDG PET/CT imaging for etiological diagnosis of pericardial effusion from 2014 to 2024 in our hospital. Clinical, laboratory, and imaging data from FDG PET/CT were evaluated to characterize pericardial effusions attributable to malignant conditions, bacterial infections, other benign etiologies, and idiopathic causes, thus assessing the diagnostic efficacy of FDG PET/CT.
resultsPericardial lesions exhibited significant thickening and markedly increased FDG uptake in 89.5% of malignant cases and 77.8% of bacterial infection cases. When integrated with extrapericardial imaging findings, FDG PET/CT directly identified the underlying etiology in 68.4% of malignant and 44.4% of bacterial infection cases. Employing an integrated "clinical-laboratory-imaging" diagnostic approach, the positive diagnostic rate of FDG PET/CT increased to 56.3%, and FDG PET/CT was able to achieve etiologically suggestive imaging diagnoses in 100% of malignant cases, 77.8% of bacterial cases, and 47.8% overall. Ultimately, FDG PET/CT contributed to clinical management in 88.7% of patients.
conclusionFDG PET/CT is valuable for the etiological diagnosis of pericardial effusions. Developing a comprehensive "clinical-laboratory-imaging" diagnostic model can substantially enhance the effectiveness of FDG PET/CT in determining the underlying causes of pericardial effusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40721572What 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.