Evidence Hub

High and typical 18F-FDG bowel uptake in patients treated with metformin

É. Gontier, Emmanuelle Fourme, Myriam Wartski, Cyrille Blondet, G. Bonardel, Elise Le Stanc, Marina Mantzarides, Herve Foehrenbach et al.

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 2007

95 participants · 201 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: This prospective and bi-centric study was conducted in order to determine the impact of antidiabetic treatments (AD) on (18)F-FDG bowel uptake in type 2 diabetic patients.

METHODS: Fifty-five patients with previously diagnosed and treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (group 1) were divided in two subgroups: AD treatment including metformin (n=32; group 1a) and AD treatment excluding metformin (n=23; group 1b). The 95 patients without diabetes mellitus made up controls (group 2). (18)F-FDG uptake in small intestine and colon was visually graded and semi-quantitatively measured using the maximum standardized uptake value.

RESULTS: (18)F-FDG bowel uptake was significantly increased in AD patients (group 1) as compared to controls (group 2) (p<0.001). Bowel uptake was significantly higher in AD patients including metformin (group 1a) as compared to AD patients excluding metformin (group 1b) (p<0.01), whose bowel uptake was not significantly different from controls (group 2). A metformin treatment was predictive of an increased bowel uptake in the small intestine (odds ratio OR=16.9, p<0.0001) and in the colon (OR=95.3, p<0.0001), independently of the other factors considered in the multivariate analysis. Bowel uptake pattern in the patients treated with metformin was typically intense, diffuse and continuous along the bowel, strongly predominant in the colon, in both the digestive wall and lumen.

CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes that metformin significantly increases…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 95 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free