PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess independent predictors of 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) uptake in brown adipose tissue (BAT) in patients undergoing repeated positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scans. PROCEDURES: Eight hundred forty-eight (mean age 50.9 ± 16 years) patients in whom PET/CT scan was repeated (mean interval 5 ± 1.5 months) constituted the study group. (18)F-FDG uptake in characteristic areas of BAT, with CT density of adipose tissue, greater than background soft-tissue activity was considered as evidence of BAT uptake. Both distribution and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were registered. Clinical and anamnestic data were collected for each patient. RESULTS: (18)F-FDG uptake in BAT was present in 8.6% patients at first scan. Independent predictors of presence of uptake were age (younger), gender (female), body mass index (lower), and maximum outdoor temperature (lower). Age was the only independent predictor of BAT (18)F-FDG uptake distribution, while SUVmax was related to both age and outdoor temperature. Independent determinants of persistence of BAT (18)F-FDG uptake at second PET/CT were outdoor temperature at time of second scan and extension of metabolically active BAT at first scan. CONCLUSIONS: Age, body mass index, and outdoor temperature are significant determinants of BAT evidence at (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Moreover, extension of BAT and outdoor temperature are the strongest determinants of persistence of BAT evidence on (18)F-FDG PET/CT in repeated scan.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess independent predictors of 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) uptake in brown adipose tissue (BAT) in patients undergoing repeated positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scans. PROCEDURES: Eight hundred forty-eight (mean age 50.9 ± 16 years) patients in whom PET/CT scan was repeated (mean interval 5 ± 1.5 months) constituted the study group. (18)F-FDG uptake in characteristic areas of BAT, with CT density of adipose tissue, greater than background soft-tissue activity was considered as evidence of BAT uptake. Both distribution and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were registered. Clinical and anamnestic data were collected for each patient. RESULTS: (18)F-FDG uptake in BAT was present in 8.6% patients at first scan. Independent predictors of presence of uptake were age (younger), gender (female), body mass index (lower), and maximum outdoor temperature (lower). Age was the only independent predictor of BAT (18)F-FDG uptake distribution, while SUVmax was related to both age and outdoor temperature. Independent determinants of persistence of BAT (18)F-FDG uptake at second PET/CT were outdoor temperature at time of second scan and extension of metabolically active BAT at first scan. CONCLUSIONS: Age, body mass index, and outdoor temperature are significant determinants of BAT evidence at (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Moreover, extension of BAT and outdoor temperature are the strongest determinants of persistence of BAT evidence on (18)F-FDG PET/CT in repeated scan.
Authors: C Rousseau; E Bourbouloux; L Campion; N Fleury; B Bridji; J F Chatal; I Resche; M Campone Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Mylene T Truong; Jeremy J Erasmus; Reginald F Munden; Edith M Marom; Bradley S Sabloff; Gregory W Gladish; Donald A Podoloff; Homer A Macapinlac Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Wouter D van Marken Lichtenbelt; Joost W Vanhommerig; Nanda M Smulders; Jamie M A F L Drossaerts; Gerrit J Kemerink; Nicole D Bouvy; Patrick Schrauwen; G J Jaap Teule Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Aaron M Cypess; Sanaz Lehman; Gethin Williams; Ilan Tal; Dean Rodman; Allison B Goldfine; Frank C Kuo; Edwin L Palmer; Yu-Hua Tseng; Alessandro Doria; Gerald M Kolodny; C Ronald Kahn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Oscar Parysow; Ana M Mollerach; Victor Jager; Silvina Racioppi; Jose San Roman; Victor H Gerbaudo Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Thomas F Hany; Esmaiel Gharehpapagh; Ehab M Kamel; Alfred Buck; Jean Himms-Hagen; Gustav K von Schulthess Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2002-08-08 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Vicente Gilsanz; Michelle L Smith; Fariba Goodarzian; Mimi Kim; Tishya A L Wren; Houchun H Hu Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2011-11-01 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Srihari C Sampath; Srinath C Sampath; Miriam A Bredella; Aaron M Cypess; Martin Torriani Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Andrew M Kim; Brendan T Keenan; Nicholas Jackson; Eugenia L Chan; Bethany Staley; Drew A Torigian; Abass Alavi; Richard J Schwab Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2014-06-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Guillermo Sanchez-Delgado; Borja Martinez-Tellez; Yolanda Garcia-Rivero; Francisco M Acosta; Juan M A Alcantara; Francisco J Amaro-Gahete; Jose M Llamas-Elvira; Luis Gracia-Marco; Jonatan R Ruiz Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 5.095