English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Cause determination is challenging in fever or inflammation of unknown origin (FUO/IUO) despite today’s diagnostic modalities. We evaluated the value of F-18 FDG PET/CT in an unselected patient collective. This retrospective nonrandomized single-center study enrolled 300 male and female patients with FUO/IUO. PET/CT findings were compared with final clinical outcomes to determine the sensitivity, specificity, clinical significance, etiological distribution of final diagnoses, impact on treatment, role of white-blood cell count (WBC), and C-reactive protein (CRP). In 54.0% (162/300) PET/CT was the decisive exanimation for establishing the final diagnosis, in 13.3% (40/300) the findings were equivocal and indecisive, in 3.3% (10/300) PET/CT findings were false positive, while in 29.3% (88/300) a normal F-18 FDG pattern was present. Statistical analysis showed a sensitivity of 80.2% and a specificity of 89.8% for the contribution of PET/CT to the final diagnosis. CRP levels and WBC were not associated with PET/CT outcome. PET/CT let to new treatment in 24.0% (72/300), treatment change in 18.0% (54/300), no treatment change in 49.6% (149/300), and in 8.3% (25/300) no data was available. Our study demonstrates the utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT for source finding in FUO/IUO if other diagnostic tools fail.

Diagnostic value of F-18 FDG PET/CT in fever or inflammation of unknown origin in a large single-center retrospective study