Evidence Hub

A novel objective method for discriminating pathological and physiological colorectal uptake in the lower abdominal region using whole-body dynamic 18F-FDG-PET.

Kato T, Ichikawa H, Shibutani T, Kita A, Watanabe M, Tada H, Sugiura A

Annals of nuclear medicine, 2023

39 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the center-of-mass shift distance (CMSD) analysis on whole-body dynamic positron emission tomography (WBD-PET) with continuous bed motion is an objective index for discriminating pathological and physiological uptake in the lower abdominal colon.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the CMSD in 39 patients who underwent delayed imaging to detect incidental focal uptake that was difficult to determine as pathological and physiological on a conventional early-PET (early) image reconstructed by 5-phase WBD-PET images. The CMSD between each phase of WBD-PET images and between conventional early and delayed (two-phase) PET images were classified into pathological and physiological uptake groups based on endoscopic histology or other imaging diagnostics. The diagnostic performance of CMSD analysis on WBD-PET images was evaluated by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis and compared to that of two-phase PET images.

RESULTS: A total of 66 incidental focal uptake detected early image were classified into 19 and 47 pathological and physiological uptake groups, respectively. The CMSD on WBD-PET and two-phase PET images in the pathological uptake group was significantly lower than that in the physiological uptake group (p < 0.01), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in CMSD analysis on WBD-PET images at the optimal cutoff of 5.2 mm estimated by the Youden index were 94.7%, 89.4%, and 89.4%, respectively, which were not…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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: 39 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