Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:10928175rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0153690lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10928175lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0203668lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10928175lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0039416lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10928175lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1707455lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10928175lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0032743lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:issue3Blld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:dateCreated2000-8-17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:abstractTextThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of positron emission tomography with 18F-2-deoxyglucose (FDG-PET) for the detection of malignant bone metastases, and to compare FDG-PET results with conventional technetium-99m methylene diophosphate (Tc-99m MDP) bone scan findings. Twenty-four patients (10 females, 14 males, ages: 39-71 years) with biopsy-proven malignancy and suspected bone metastases, underwent whole body FDG-PET and bone scan to detect bone metastases. Bone metastases were established in 39 discordant bone lesions by histopathological examination of biopsy samples, MRI/CT, and follow-up bone scan/FDG-PET findings showing progressively and extensively widespread bone lesions. A total of 98 bone lesions found on either FDG-PET or bone scan were evaluated For 39 bone lesions with discordant findings between FDG-PET and bone scan, histopathological examination, MRI/CT and follow-up bone scan/FDG-PET findings revealed 8 metastatic and 0 benign bone lesions with positive FDG-PET findings, not detected on bone scan. Eleven metastatic and 20 benign bone lesions with positive bone scan findings were not detected on FDG-PET. FDG-PET has a better specificity, but a lower sensitivity for detecting malignant bone metastases when compared with bone scan.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:issn0250-7005lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TsaiS CSClld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KaoC HCHlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorpubmed-author:YeoR GRGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorpubmed-author:YimYYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorpubmed-author:HsiehJ FJFlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:volume20lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:pagination2189-92lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10928175...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:articleTitleComparison and discrepancy of 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Tc-99m MDP bone scan to detect bone metastases.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:affiliationDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan. kao@vghtc.vghtc.gov.twlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10928175pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:10928175lld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:10928175lld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:10928175lld:pubmed