↓ Skip to main content

Difference in F-18 FDG Uptake After Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Colonoscopy in Healthy Sedated Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1 Mendeley
Title
Difference in F-18 FDG Uptake After Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Colonoscopy in Healthy Sedated Subjects
Published in
Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13139-016-0460-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jong-Ryool Oh, Ji-Hyoung Seo, Woo-Jin Chang, Seung-Il Bae, In-Wook Song, Jin-Gu Bong, Hye-Yeon Jeong, So-Young Park, Jeongyup Bae, Hyundae Yoon

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate the difference in fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in sedated healthy subjects after they underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy procedures. The endoscopy group (n = 29) included healthy subjects who underwent screening via F-18 FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) after an EGD and/or colonoscopy under sedation on the same day. The control group (n = 35) included healthy subjects who underwent screening via PET/CT only. FDG uptake in the tongue, uvula, epiglottis, vocal cords, esophagus, stomach, duodenum, liver, cecum, colon, anus, and muscle were compared between the two groups. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in the tongue, pharynx, larynx, and esophagus did not significantly differ between the endoscopy and control groups. In contrast, mean SUVmax in the whole stomach was 18 % higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (SUVmax: 2.96 vs. 2.51, P = 0.010). In the lower gastrointestinal track, SUVmax from the cecum to the rectum was not significantly different between the two groups, whereas SUVmax in the anus was 20 % higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (SUVmax: 4.21 vs. 3.50, P = 0.002). SUVmax in the liver and muscle was not significantly different between the two groups. Mean volume of the stomach and mean cross section of the colon was significantly higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (stomach: 313.28 cm(3) vs. 209.93 cm(3), P < 0.001, colon: 8.82 cm(2) vs. 5.98 cm(2), P = 0.001). EGD and colonoscopy under sedation does not lead to significant differences in SUVmax in most parts of the body. Only gastric FDG uptake in the EGD subjects and anal FDG uptake in the colonoscopy subjects was higher than uptake in those regions in the control subjects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 September 2017.
All research outputs
#18,571,001
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#119
of 208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,645
of 415,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 415,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.