The Use of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET in the Diagnosis of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis Including the Ontario Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Cardiac sarcoidosis is a potentially fatal complication of sarcoidosis. The 1993 guidelines of the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (MHLW) of Japan have been used as the diagnostic gold standard and for comparison with imaging modalities. (18)F-FDG PET is not currently included in the guidelines. However, studies have shown promising data using (18)F-FDG PET. We conducted a systematic review of studies that evaluated the accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis compared with MHLW guidelines. Data from a prospective Ontario provincial registry are also reported and included in the metaanalysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies that satisfied predetermined criteria. Quality evaluation using the Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was performed by 2 independent masked observers. Data were extracted and analyzed to measure study-specific and pooled accuracy for (18)F-FDG PET compared with the MHLW as the reference. RESULTS: A total of 519 titles was identified; 7 studies, including the Ontario registry, were selected for inclusion. Metaanalysis of these 7 studies was conducted, with a total of 164 patients, most of whom had been diagnosed with systemic sarcoidosis. The prevalence of cardiac sarcoidosis was 50% in the whole population. Pooled estimates for (18)F-FDG PET yielded 89% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 79%-96%), 78% specificity (95% CI, 68%-86%), a 4.1 positive likelihood ratio (95% CI, 1.7-10), and a 0.19 negative likelihood ratio (95% CI, 0.1-0.4). The overall diagnostic odds ratio was 25.6 (95% CI, 7.3-89.5), and the area under the summary receiver operator characteristic curve was 93% ± 3.5. The Ontario study yielded sensitivity and specificity of 79% and 70%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The high diagnostic accuracy determined for (18)F-FDG PET in this metaanalysis suggests potential value for diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis compared with the MHLW guidelines. These results may affect patient care by providing supportive evidence for more effective use of (18)F-FDG PET in the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis. Large-scale multicenter studies are required to further evaluate this role.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".