PURPOSE: It is important to differentiate malignant from benign lesions of intraocular masses in choosing therapeutic plan. Biopsy of intraocular tumor is not recommended due to the risk of visual damage. We evaluated the usefulness of F-18-FDG PET imaging in diagnosing intraocular neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: F-l8-FDG PET scan was performed in 13 patients (15 lesions) suspected to have malignant intraocular tumors. There were 3 benign lesions (retinal detachment, choroidal effusion and hemorrhage) and 10 patients with 12 malignant lesions (3 melanomas, 7 retinoblastomas and 2 metastatic cancers). Regional eye images (256*256 and 128*128 matrices) were obtained with or without attenuation correction. Whole body scan was also performed in eight patients (3 benign and 6 malignant lesions). RESULTS: All malignant lesions were visualized while all benign lesions were not visualized. The mean peak standardized uptake value (SUV) of malignant lesions was 2.64+/-0.57 g/ml. There was no correlations between peak SUV and tumor volume. Two large malignant lesions (>1000 mm3 ) showed hot uptake on whole body scan. But two medium-sized lesions (100-l000 mm3) looked faint and two small (<100 mm3) lesions were not visualized. The images reconstructed with 256*256 matrix showed lesions more clearly than those with 128X128 matrix. CONCLUSION: F-18-FDG PET scan is highly sensitivity in detecting malignant intraocular tumor. For the evaluation of small-sized intraocular lesions, whole body scan is not appropriate because of low sensitivity. A regional scan with sufficient acquisition time is recommended for that purpose. Image reconstruction in matrix size of 256*256 produced clearer images than the ones in 128X128, but it does not affect the diagnostic sensitivity.
Biopsy ; Choroid ; Diagnosis* ; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted ; Melanoma ; Orbital Neoplasms ; Positron-Emission Tomography ; Retinoblastoma ; Tumor Burden ; Whole Body Imaging

BACKGROUND: Research is essential for the development of family medicine as a professional field in primary care. Since information is available through the articles in the Journals of Family Medicine which contains subjects such as disease mechanism, pathophysiology, drug or new treatment method, and it is necessary to evaluate the contribution of recent researches in this field. This paper is intended to evaluate the current status of the quality of papers published in the Journal of the Korea Academy of Family Medicine (below JKAFM) and provide statistical data & direction of studies in the future. METHODS: 1218 articles in 185 editions of JKAFM were analyzed among 188 editions published from Nov. 1980 to Dec. 1996. The papers were classified into Case Report, Original Article, Review Article by the type of papers, and then categorized Into descriptive studies, analytic studies, and clinical trials by its methodology. In each category, the papers were stratified by the topic. Also, the analysis was conducted according to the authors, research subjects, sampling methods and the statistical methods, and observed the changes each year through 1980s to 1990s. RESULTS: The portion of original articles has increased from 18.6% in 1980s to 73.9% in 1990s. In terms of research methodology, the portions of analytical studies and clinical trials occupy 28.8% and 2.1% in 1990's respectively, compared with those of 1.8% and 0.6% in 1980's. When the papers were stratified by study topics, topics on family medicine showed the highest of 34.9% of the total. According to the detailed stratification, the principle of family medicine recorded 24.2%. In terms of sampling method, 89% and above was from the clinical data when current data were used, and 69.1% was by questionnaires when the data were newly collected. The most of the study subjects were outpatients of family medicine departments. The portion of papers in which the statistical analysis was not included was 29.9% in 1980s which decreased to 15.7% in 1990s. In terms of the statistical analysis methodology, the Chi-square test was the most frequently used(26.2%), followed by Descriptive(19.6%),1-test(18.2% ) and ANOVA(8.7%) were the next. CONCLUSIONS: The academic performance of family medicine can be most effectively measured by the analysis of the journals on family medicine. According to the analysis, the papers based on clinical activity is increasing in recent years with substantial contribution, which means that the field of family medicine has found its own position in medical science and is developing actively. In terms of study methodology, the portion of analytical study is getting larger, and the various method are being tried. The application of statistical methods is being developed in its quality and quantity. It should be noted that research on family medicine should provide the basis for new knowledge and promote public health by the integrated and intensive efforts.
Humans ; Korea ; Outpatients ; Primary Health Care ; Public Health ; Research Design ; Research Subjects ; Surveys and Questionnaires