| Title |
FDG PET-CT findings of extra-thoracic sarcoid are associated with cardiac sarcoid: A rationale for using FGD PET-CT for cardiac sarcoid evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-017-0962-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Darshan C Patel, Senthil S Gunasekaran, Christopher Goettl, Nadera J Sweiss, Yang Lu |
| Abstract |
This retrospective study investigates the relationship between cardiac and extra-thoracic sarcoid findings on FDG PET-CT using a 72-hour pretest high-fat, high-protein, and very low-carbohydrate (HFHPVLC) diet. A total of 196 consecutive FDG PET-CT scans with 72-hour HFHPVLC diet preparation were performed between December 2014 and December 2015 in known sarcoid patients. Of these scans, 5 were excluded for non-adherence to diet preparation or underlying cancer. Cardiac and extra-thoracic sarcoid lesions were categorized and measured for radiotracer uptake. A total of 188 patients had 191 eligible FDG PET/CT scans (3 follow-up scans), of which there were 20 (10%) positive, 6 indeterminate (3%), and 165 (86%) negative for CS. Among the 20 scans positive for CS, 8 (40%) had findings of both cardiac and extra-thoracic sarcoid. Our study shows that 40% of CS patients also have FDG PET-CT findings of extra-thoracic sarcoid. This makes an intriguing case for FDG PET-CT use with pretest diet prep over cardiac MRI (CMR) for cardiac sarcoid evaluation, given that CMR is likely to overlook these extra-thoracic sites of disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 27% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Librarian | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 45% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 107. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2017.
All research outputs
#393,569
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#6
of 2,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,320
of 325,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#2
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,045 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,887 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.