Trial reportPloS one2019
Hybrid FDG PET/MRI vs. FDG PET and CT in patients with suspected dementia - A comparison of diagnostic yield and propagated influence on clinical diagnosis and patient management.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility Study for a Microstrip Transmission Line RF Coil Integrated with a PET Detector Module in a 7T Human MR Imaging System.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Article
- Positron Emission Tomography-Magnetic Resonance Imaging, a New Hybrid Imaging Modality for Dentomaxillofacial Malignancies-A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Current Trends and Applications of PET/MRI Hybrid Imaging in Neurodegenerative Diseases and Normal Aging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Pre-training via Transfer Learning and Pretext Learning a Convolutional Neural Network for Automated Assessments of Clinical PET Image Quality.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2023Article
- A zero-dose synthetic baseline for the personalized analysis of [Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography findings in neurodegenerative diseases: Current status and future directions.The neuroradiology journal · 2021Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy and Confidence of [18F] FDG PET/MRI in comparison with PET or MRI alone in Head and Neck Cancer.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Multimodal analysis using [EJNMMI research · 2020Article
- Zero Echo Time MRAC on FDG-PET/MR Maintains Diagnostic Accuracy for Alzheimer's Disease; A Simulation Study Combining ADNI-Data.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are routinely used in the evaluation of memory clinic patients. Hybrid PET/MR systems now allow simultaneous PET and MRI imaging within the duration of the PET emission scan. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic yield of PET/MRI using an abbreviated MR protocol with that of separate PET and CT in a mixed memory clinic population, and the propagated influences on clinical diagnosis and patient management. MATERIAL AND
methodsConsecutive memory clinic patients (n = 78) undergoing both CT and hybrid FDG PET/MRI scans were identified retrospectively. MRI and CT were separately evaluated for vascular and structural pathology. PET scans were classified according to the presence of neurodegenerative or vascular disease using CT or MRI, respectively, for anatomical guiding. A memory clinic expert assessed the clinical impact of the additional findings and/or change of PET classification achieved by MRI anatomical guiding as compared to CT guiding.
resultsMRI lead to significantly higher Fazekas scores, higher medial temporal and global cortical atrophy scores, and identified more patients with infarcts (28 vs 8, p<0.001) compared to CT. MRI changed PET classification in 13 (17%) patients. Addition of MRI to CT had minor clinical impact in 4/78 (5%) and major clinical impact in 13/78 (17%) of patients.
conclusionThe study demonstrates the capabilities of PET/MRI systems for routine clinical imaging of memory clinic patients, and that even an abbreviated hybrid PET/MRI protocol provides significant additional information influencing clinical diagnosis and patient management in a substantial fraction of patients when compared to separate PET and CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.