ArticleThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging2025
FDG-PET/CT in infected and non-infected prosthetic vascular grafts.
Article in The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prosthetic vascular graft infections (PVGI) pose a significant clinical challenge due to high morbidity and mortality. FDG-PET/CT has emerged as a promising diagnostic tool, however, differentiating between infected and non-infected grafts is complex because non-infected grafts can also exhibit inflammatory FDG uptake. This overlap complicates interpretation, necessitating the refinement of diagnostic criteria. We evaluated the diagnostic utility of FDG-PET/CT in distinguishing infected from non-infected grafts, focusing on FDG uptake intensity and pattern while determining optimal semi-quantitative thresholds. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 80 patients who underwent FDG-PET/CT and had either infected or non-infected grafts. FDG-PET/CT images were analyzed based on FDG uptake intensity using a visual grading scale, FDG uptake pattern, and semi-quantitative parameters such as standardized uptake value (SUV) and target-to-background ratio (TBR). FDG uptake intensity assessment demonstrated that 92.6% of PVGI patients exhibited grade 3 uptake, compared to 62.3% of non-infected patients. Analysis of FDG uptake patterns also showed a significant difference, with focal uptake observed in 66.7% of infected patients versus 20.8% of non-infected patients. PVGI patients displayed significantly higher median SUVmax and TBR values than non-infected grafts. An SUVmax threshold of 6.2 demonstrated a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 79% for PVGI diagnosis. Similarly, a TBR cutoff of 3.3 yielded a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 81%. FDG-PET/CT is increasingly recognized as a valuable diagnostic tool for PVGI, particularly through the assessment of uptake intensity, pattern, SUVmax, and TBR parameters. Our study strengthens its established role and provides important data that may help refine diagnostic thresholds, further enhancing its utility in clinical practice. However, cautious interpretation remains essential to avoid unnecessary procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40864389What 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.