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 Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

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 annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of whole-body 18 F-FDG PET or 18 F-FDG PET/CT for detection of underlying malignancy in patients with clinically suspected neurologic and nonneurologic paraneoplastic syndromes. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed (Medline), Embase, and Scopus (last updated November 2016) to identify relevant published studies reporting the performance of 18 F-FDG PET or 18 F-FDG PET/CT in patients with suspected paraneoplastic syndrome. Histopathologic confirmation or clinical follow-up was considered as the reference standard. Pooled estimates, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. A summary receiver-operating-characteristic curve was constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was determined along with the Q* index. Results: Twenty-one studies including a total of 1,293 individual patients suspected of having a paraneoplastic syndrome and who underwent 18 F-FDG PET or 18 F-FDG PET/CT examinations met our inclusion criteria. There was moderate to high heterogeneity among the included studies. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio of 18 F-FDG PET or 18 F-FDG PET/CT for the detection of underlying malignancy were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86), 0.88 (95% CI, 0.86-0.90), and 34.03 (95% CI, 18.76-61.72), respectively. The AUC and the Q* index were 0.916 (SE, 0.018) and 0.849, indicating excellent diagnostic accuracy. The diagnostic accuracy was slightly improved after studies with high applicability concerns were excluded (AUC, 0.931; SE, 0.020). In a subgroup analysis, 18 F-FDG PET/CT was found to have a significantly higher specificity (0.89 vs. 0.79) than 18 F-FDG PET alone, with no evidence of significant difference in the overall performance (AUC, 0.930 vs. 0.891; 2-tailed P value for difference, 0.31). Conclusion: This meta-analysis of available studies demonstrates that whole-body 18 F-FDG PET or 18 F-FDG PET/CT has high diagnostic accuracy and moderate to high sensitivity and specificity for detection of underlying malignancy in patients suspected of having a paraneoplastic syndrome.

the journal of nuclear medicine

Whole-Body <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Suspected Paraneoplastic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy

Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET and 18F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Suspected Paraneoplastic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy

Whole-Body ¹⁸F-FDG PET and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Suspected Paraneoplastic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy