SynthesisEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
Diagnostic value of [
Synthesis in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
background2-deoxy-2-[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is a hybrid imaging tool increasingly recognized for its effectiveness in evaluating inflammatory and infectious diseases. An emerging application of [18F]FDG PET/CT is the detection of infectious and inflammatory foci in critically ill patients within the intensive care unit (ICU). We performed a systematic review and a diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis to assess the value of [18F]FDG PET/CT in this setting.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases, covering studies published up to May 2025. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR + and LR-), and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) along with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), were calculated. In addition, assessment of publication bias and statistical heterogeneity was conducted.
resultsEight studies (n = 228 patients) were included in the systematic review with seven studies (n = 181 patients) eligible for the meta-analysis. Most contributions of [18F]FDG PET/CT to patient management involved guiding interventional procedures and adjustments to medical therapy such as antimicrobial and corticosteroid treatment. Adverse events related to patient transport or PET/CT scan were not reported in most studies, with exception of one. In terms of diagnostic performance for identifying infectious and inflammatory foci in critically ill patients, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, DOR, LR + and LR − were 91% (95%CI: 80–96), 78% (95%CI: 64–87), 35 (95%CI: 10–121), 4 (95%CI: 2.3–7.1) and 0.12 (0.05–0.28), respectively. No significant statistical heterogeneity or publication bias was detected.
conclusion[18F]FDG PET/CT appears to be a reliable imaging tool for detecting infectious and inflammatory foci in critically ill patients. Its findings have a significant impact on clinical decision-making, particularly in guiding interventional procedures and optimizing medical therapy. However, prospective studies to determine the incidence of findings in a unbiased setting and with use of robust reference standards are warranted to further strengthen and validate the diagnostic value of [18F]FDG PET/CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41593360What 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.