Key result
FDG PET imaging validation for large vessel vasculitis requires evidence of management impact, treatment outcomes, and cost-effectiveness to meet increasing funding benchmarks.
Highlights the evidentiary requirements and historical context of validating FDG PET-CT imaging for clinical funding and implementation.
FDG PET imaging in large vessel vasculitis: Stuck at the first hurdle?There are six steps of evolution to validate and implement a new imaging technology: technical capacity, diagnostic and staging impact, management impact, treatment outcomes and cost-effectiveness.Increasingly the benchmark for funding of imaging tests is being raised requiring evidence for the last three steps.2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG PET-CT) has become an integral part of diagnosis and management for many cancers since its first in-human use for brain tumor in 1986.One of the key drivers has been the continuing improvement in the scanner technology, with the introduction of commercially available whole-body PET in the mid-1990s, hybrid PET-CT in early 2000s, and more recently PETmagnetic resonance imaging (PET-MRI) and digital PET detector since early the 2010s, offering a multi-parametric imaging approach and significantly improved count rate capability, image contrast and resolution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peter Lin (2019) conducted an editorial in Large vessel vasculitis. FDG PET imaging was evaluated. FDG PET imaging validation for large vessel vasculitis requires evidence of management impact, treatment outcomes, and cost-effectiveness to meet increasing funding benchmarks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: