Next Article in Journal
PSMA Receptor-Based PET-CT: The Basics and Current Status in Clinical and Research Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Deciphering the Autoantibody Response to the OJ Antigenic Complex
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diagnostics
Volume 13
Issue 1
10.3390/diagnostics13010157
Review Report
diagnostics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Performance of Deauville Criteria in [18F]FDG-PET/CT Diagnostics of Giant Cell Arteritis

Diagnostics 2023, 13(1), 157; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010157
by Jeffrey Siefert 1,*,†, Jonas Kaufmann 1,†, Felix Thiele 1, Thula Walter-Rittel 2, Julian Rogasch 1,3, Robert Biesen 4, Gerd R. Burmester 4, Holger Amthauer 1, Udo Schneider 4 and Christian Furth 1
Reviewer 1:
Cyrille Blondet
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Diagnostics 2023, 13(1), 157; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010157
Submission received: 27 November 2022 / Revised: 28 December 2022 / Accepted: 29 December 2022 / Published: 3 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Medical Imaging and Theranostics)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article discusses the application of FDG PET-CT Deauville five-point-scaling in active giant cell arteritis. The subject is interesting and poses a diagnostic challenge for these patients: under-treatment or over-treatment are both of particular consequences. Although retrospective on a small number of patients, this study highlights some advantages of Deauville scoring. Interestingly, CRP in the comparison cohort was as high as in the patient cohort: this fact increases robustness of conclusions.

Methods:

Please define Deauville scoring more precisely, which is visual. So what are the Results about? The visual Deauville analysis or the Deauville scoring improved by using the meanSUVs on the vessel segment, liver and right atrium, as described at the end of 2.3 Image assessment? The discussion seems to confirm the use of SUV (lines 300 to 306). Please explain.

Results:

Please explain why myocarditis was a reason for exclusion a posteriori.

Define RZA, PMR and TAB.

Figure 1:

Deauville 3 training data set: why not choose the ascending aorta, which has an apparently higher FDGF uptake than the descending aorta?

References:

Cited twice: 9 and 28

Besson FL, Parienti JJ, Bienvenu B, et al. Diagnostic performance of (1)(8)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomog-401 raphy in giant cell arteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(9):1764-72. doi: 402 10.1007/s00259-011-1830-0

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

thank you very much for your considerate feedback.

For our revisions please see the attachment.

Kind regards

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The method by which the physicians chosen the size and location of the ROIs in the different anatomical districts should be improved

Since the images evaluation is not completely subjective, but the choice is guided by a semiquantitative index (SUV), the authors should better justify the differences in evaluation between the readers with some examples

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

thank you very much for your considerate feedback.

For our revisions please see the attachment.

Kind regards

Jonas Kaufmann

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop