Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
A pulmonary lesion is an extremely common and clinically challenging disorder worldwide, and an accurate diagnosis of lung cancer is crucial for early treatment and management. The aim of the present study was to perform a comprehensive meta analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of F-fluorothymidine (F-FLT) positron emission tomography (PET) with F-fluorodeoxyglucose (F-FDG) PET in evaluating patients with pulmonary lesions. Relevant studies were identified using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases. The pooled estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood ratio, negative-likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for F-FLT PET versus F-FDG PET were calculated as the main outcome measures. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were also constructed by Meta-Disk 1.4 software using a Mose's constant of linear model. The meta analysis showed that F-FLT PET had a higher specificity (0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.77), but lower sensitivity (0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87) compared to F-FDG PET (0.50; 95% CI, 0.41-0.58 for specificity; 0.92; 95% CI 0.86-0.95 for sensitivity). For DOR, F-FLT PET (12.58; 95% CI, 6.81-23.24) was higher compared to F-FDG PET (10.72; 95% CI, 5.51-20.87). The area under the curve was 0.8592 and 0.9240 for F-FLT PET and F-FDG PET, respectively (Z=0.976, P>0.05). In conclusion, F-FLT PET and F-FDG PET had good diagnostic performance for the overall assessment of pulmonary lesions, and F-FLT PET had a higher specificity compared to F-FDG PET, but was less sensitive than F-FDG PET. Therefore, F-FLT and F-FDG together could add diagnostic confidence for pulmonary lesions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4251140 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.440 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!