Y H Lee1, S J Choi2, J D Ji2, G G Song2. 1. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Korea University Medical Center, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, South Korea. lyhcgh@korea.ac.kr. 2. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Korea University Medical Center, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) or positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for patients with large vessel vasculitis. METHODS: Based on a search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, a meta-analysis was performed on the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT in patients with large vessel vasculitis. RESULTS: A total of eight studies involving 400 subjects (170 vasculitis patients and 230 controls) were selected for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 75.9 % (95 % confidence interval, CI 68.7-82.1) and 93.0 % (95 % CI 88.9-96.0), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 7.267 (95 % CI 3.707-14.24), 0.303 (95 % CI 0.229-0.400), and 32.04 (95 % CI 13.08-78.45), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.863 and the Q* index 0.794, indicating good diagnostic accuracy. There was no evidence of a threshold effect (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.120, p = 0.776). When the data were limited to giant cell arteritis (GCA), the pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 83.3 % (95 % CI 72.1-91.4) and 89.6 % (95 % CI 79.7-95.7), respectively; AUC was 0.884, and the Q* index 0.815, indicating modest accuracy with a small increase in diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of published studies demonstrates that 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT has good diagnostic accuracy for large vessel vasculitis and plays an important role in the diagnosis of this condition.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) or positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for patients with large vessel vasculitis. METHODS: Based on a search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, a meta-analysis was performed on the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT in patients with large vessel vasculitis. RESULTS: A total of eight studies involving 400 subjects (170 vasculitispatients and 230 controls) were selected for meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 75.9 % (95 % confidence interval, CI 68.7-82.1) and 93.0 % (95 % CI 88.9-96.0), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 7.267 (95 % CI 3.707-14.24), 0.303 (95 % CI 0.229-0.400), and 32.04 (95 % CI 13.08-78.45), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.863 and the Q* index 0.794, indicating good diagnostic accuracy. There was no evidence of a threshold effect (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.120, p = 0.776). When the data were limited to giant cell arteritis (GCA), the pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT were 83.3 % (95 % CI 72.1-91.4) and 89.6 % (95 % CI 79.7-95.7), respectively; AUC was 0.884, and the Q* index 0.815, indicating modest accuracy with a small increase in diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of published studies demonstrates that 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT has good diagnostic accuracy for large vessel vasculitis and plays an important role in the diagnosis of this condition.
Authors: J Meller; F Strutz; U Siefker; A Scheel; C O Sahlmann; K Lehmann; M Conrad; R Vosshenrich Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2003-04-04 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Martin Fuchs; Matthias Briel; Thomas Daikeler; Ulrich A Walker; Helmut Rasch; Scott Berg; Quinn K T Ng; Heike Raatz; David Jayne; Ina Kötter; Daniel Blockmans; Maria C Cid; Sergio Prieto-González; Peter Lamprecht; Carlo Salvarani; Zaharenia Karageorgaki; Richard Watts; Raashid Luqmani; Jan Müller-Brand; Alan Tyndall; Martin A Walter Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-11-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Petra Lehmann; Sarah Buchtala; Nelli Achajew; Peter Haerle; Boris Ehrenstein; Hamid Lighvani; Martin Fleck; Joerg Marienhagen Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2010-10-23 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Martin A Walter; Ralph A Melzer; Christian Schindler; Jan Müller-Brand; Alan Tyndall; Egbert U Nitzsche Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2005-03-04 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Peter C Grayson; Sara Alehashemi; Armin A Bagheri; Ali Cahid Civelek; Thomas R Cupps; Mariana J Kaplan; Ashkan A Malayeri; Peter A Merkel; Elaine Novakovich; David A Bluemke; Mark A Ahlman Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Kaitlin A Quinn; Hugh D Alessi; Cristina Ponte; Emily Rose; Mark A Ahlman; Christopher Redmond; Yiming Luo; Ertugrul Cagri Bolek; Carol A Langford; Peter A Merkel; Peter C Grayson Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2022-10-06 Impact factor: 7.046
Authors: Kaitlin A Quinn; Joel S Rosenblum; Casey A Rimland; K Bates Gribbons; Mark A Ahlman; Peter C Grayson Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Himanshu R Dashora; Joel S Rosenblum; Kaitlin A Quinn; Hugh Alessi; Elaine Novakovich; Babak Saboury; Mark A Ahlman; Peter C Grayson Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 10.057