Table 3.
Characteristics of the studies selected for evaluating the diagnostic performance of FDG-PET or FDG-PET/CT in RCC
| Author | Year | Designa | Male | Female | Age range (years) | Mean age (median) (years) | Referenceb | FDG | Reviewer | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ramdave et al.[12] | 2001 | R | 14 | 11 | 32–79 | 61 | px | 10 mCi | 2 | – |
| Chang et al.[13] | 2003 | R | 7 | 8 | 23–76 | 55.6 | px | 10 mCi | – | – |
| Miyakita et al.[14] | 2002 | R | 15 | 4 | 30–72 | 57.5 | Px | 260–370 MBq | – | 1997.1–1998.3 |
| Safaei et al.[15] | 2002 | R | 28 | 8 | 26–69 | 54 | px, fu | 15 mCi | report | 1996.2–2000.2 |
| Wu et al.[16] | 2002 | P | 12 | 6 | 46–73 | / | px, fu | 10 mCi | 2–3 | – |
| Aide et al.[17] | 2003 | P | 32 | 21 | 33–86 | 60 | px, fu | 2 MBp/kg | 2 | 2000.3–2002.7 |
| Jadvar et al.[18] | 2003 | R | 18 | 7 | 42–81 | / | px, fu | 10–15 mCi | 2 | – |
| Majhail et al.[19] | 2003 | R | 19 | 5 | 45–82 | (63) | px | 8–17.3 mCi | 2 | – |
| Kang et al.[20] | 2004 | R | 49 | 17 | 28–79 | 58.8 | px, fu | – | 1 | 1995.5–2002.1 |
| Park et al.[21] | 2009 | R | 47 | 16 | 31–76 | (54) | px, fu | 10 mCi | – | 2004.5–2006.6 |
| Nakatani et al.[22] | 2009 | R | 18 | 6 | 45–78 | 63 | px, fu | 370 MBq/130 MBq | ≥2 | 2000.8–2008.1 |
| Kumar et al.[23] | 2010 | R | 55 | 8 | 22–88 | 56.85 | px fu | 370 MBq | 2 | 2006.1–2009.12 |
| Llano et al.[24] | 2010 | R | 42 | 16 | 20–79 | 62.8 | px, fu | 2.5 MBq/kg | 2 | 1997.3–2005.12 |
| Ozulker et al.[25] | 2011 | P | 8 | 10 | 40–81 | 57.4 | px | 370–555 MBq | 2 | 2008.12–2010.6 |
aP, prospective; R, retrospective.
bStudy reference: fu, clinical follow-up; px, pathology.