ReviewThe British journal of radiology2026
Nuclear medicine imaging to guide antibiotic therapy: an expert review.
Review in The British journal of radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Annals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of radiolabelled-WBC scintigraphy in patients with antibiotic therapy.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
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
Bacterial infections and multidrug resistance remain a major global threat. New clinical tools are, therefore, urgently needed to identify bacterial infections and monitor response to antibiotics. Nuclear medicine imaging affords unique opportunities to target and identify bacterial infections, enabling spatial characterization as well as noninvasive, temporal monitoring of the natural course of the disease and response to therapy. In this expert review, we present an overview of the role of [18F]-FDG PET/CT and WBC scintigraphy with or without SPECT/CT in predicting treatment response to antibiotics and guide their interruption. A decrease in the [18F]FDG uptake or a change of uptake patterns could be potentially used to assess the results of antibiotic therapy in patients with different infectious diseases, despite robust evidence lacking. Concerning WBC scan, their high specificity to target and accumulation over time in infected areas is crucial for the differential diagnosis between infections and sterile inflammation, thus being useful also for therapy follow-up. However, specificity can be reduced in patients with ongoing antibiotics and little is known about the best time window to perform scintigraphy. Finally, we analyzed the potential usefulness of most promising radiolabelled bacterial tracers as potential alternative to FDG and WBC for therapy follow-up.
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.