Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41737269›Full record

ReviewBJR case reports2026

PET-CT standardized uptake values are increased in focal nodular marrow hyperplasia: a review of indeterminate marrow lesions at a large teaching hospital.

Alexander Pearce, Michael Thomas, Fiona Witham

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJR case reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Alexander PearceDepartment of Radiology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, United Kingdom.
Michael ThomasDepartment of Radiology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, United Kingdom.
Fiona WithamDepartment of Radiology, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth PO6 3LY, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1744-3923

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Focal nodular marrow hyperplasia (FNMH) is a benign entity that can create diagnostic uncertainty for the radiologist and, if not recognized, can lead to unnecessary intervention or cause interruption in potential treatment due to the need for follow-up imaging for clarification. Current research suggests lesions with a standardized uptake value over 3.6 on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and CT scans should be considered metastatic rather than benign. The aims of this study are to analyze the multimodality characteristics of FNMH, educate the reader, and recommend imaging techniques to improve specificity in the absence of histological analysis. Patients who underwent cross-sectional imaging and nuclear medicine studies between 2018 and 2023 were collected, after concerns were raised as to the nature of indeterminate bone marrow lesions. Data were collected on demographics, malignancy, site of index lesion, imaging characteristics, and follow-up. A total of 9 eligible patients were collected. All patients underwent CT and MRI scanning. 8 of the 9 had Positron emission tomography CT (PETCT), of which 7 had standardized uptake values for PETCT exceeding 3.6 using different radiotracers. All but one of the cases were conservatively managed; the remaining case received radiotherapy to their lesion. FNMH can demonstrate higher PET standardized uptake values (SUV) than previously reported in the literature. This has important implications for treatment as the SUV overlaps with those of metastatic bony lesions. Work is needed to improve the distinction between benign and malignant lesions that lie at this threshold of uptake level.

Indexed as

benign bone lesionsbone metastasesFNMHhaematopoietic islandmarrow hyperplasiaMRIPET

Identifiers

PMID41737269
PMCPMC12927411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.