| Title |
Can FDG-PET/CT replace blind bone marrow biopsy of the posterior iliac crest in Ewing sarcoma?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Skeletal Radiology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00256-017-2807-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ömer Kasalak, Andor W. J. M. Glaudemans, Jelle Overbosch, Paul C. Jutte, Thomas C. Kwee |
| Abstract |
To determine and compare the value of (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) to blind bone marrow biopsy (BMB) of the posterior iliac crest in detecting metastatic bone marrow involvement in newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma. This retrospective study included 20 patients with newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma who underwent pretreatment FDG-PET/CT and a total of 38 blind BMBs (two unilateral and 18 bilateral) of the posterior iliac crest. FDG-PET/CT scans were evaluated for bone marrow involvement, both in the posterior iliac crest and other sites, and compared to blind BMB results. FDG-PET/CT was positive for bone marrow involvement in 7/38 posterior iliac crests, whereas BMB was positive in 5/38 posterior iliac crests. FDG-PET/CT and BMB results in the posterior iliac crest agreed in 36/38 cases (94.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 82.7-98.5%). On a patient level, FDG-PET/CT was positive for bone marrow involvement in 4/20 patients, whereas BMB of the posterior iliac crest was positive in 3/20 patients. On a patient level, FDG-PET/CT and BMB results agreed in 19/20 patients (95.0%, 95% CI: 76.4-99.1%). The only discrepancies between FDG-PET/CT and BMB were observed in two BMBs of one patient. Both BMBs in this patient were negative, whereas FDG-PET/CT indicated bilateral posterior iliac crest involvement and also extensive bone marrow involvement elsewhere. FDG-PET/CT appears to be a valuable method for metastatic bone marrow assessment in newly diagnosed Ewing sarcoma. The routine use of blind BMB of the posterior iliac crest should be reconsidered when FDG-PET/CT is available. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 29% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 67% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 11 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,451,991
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Radiology
#1,336
of 1,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,681
of 331,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Radiology
#46
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 331,173 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.