| Title |
Patient preparation for cardiac fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging of inflammation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-016-0502-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael T Osborne, Edward A Hulten, Venkatesh L Murthy, Hicham Skali, Viviany R Taqueti, Sharmila Dorbala, Marcelo F DiCarli, Ron Blankstein |
| Abstract |
Although the number of clinical applications for fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) has continued to grow, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the ideal method of suppressing normal myocardial glucose utilization for image optimization. This review describes various patient preparation protocols that have been used as well as the success rates achieved in different studies. Collectively, the available literature supports using a high-fat, no-carbohydrate diet for at least two meals with a fast of 4-12 hours prior to (18)F-FDG PET imaging and suggests that isolated fasting for less than 12 hours and supplementation with food or drink just prior to imaging should be avoided. Each institution should adopt a protocol and continuously monitor its effectiveness with a goal to achieve adequate myocardial suppression in greater than 80% of patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 7 | 88% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 24% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 51% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 24 August 2021.
All research outputs
#2,614,486
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#82
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,932
of 354,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#2
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 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 95% 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 354,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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.