PET/MRI in Pediatric Neuroimaging: Primer for Clinical Practice

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Mathews JD,
   2. Forsythe AV,
   3. Brady Z, et al

   . Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 2013;346:f2360 doi:10.1136/bmj.f2360 pmid:23694687

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   1. Pearce MS,
   2. Salotti JA,
   3. Little MP, et al

   . Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:499–505 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0 pmid:22681860

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Chawla SC,
   2. Federman N,
   3. Zhang D, et al

   . Estimated cumulative radiation dose from PET/CT in children with malignancies: a 5-year retrospective review. Pediatr Radiol 2010;40:681–86 doi:10.1007/s00247-009-1434-z pmid:19967534

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Daldrup-Link H

   . How PET/MR can add value for children with cancer. Curr Radiol Rep 2017;5:15 doi:10.1007/s40134-017-0207-y pmid:28695063

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Schafer JF, et al

   . Simultaneous whole-body PET/MR imaging in comparison to PET/CT in pediatric oncology: initial results. Radiology 2014;273:220–31 doi:10.1148/radiol.14131732 pmid:24877983

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Ponisio MR,
   2. McConathy J,
   3. Laforest R, et al

   . Evaluation of diagnostic performance of whole-body simultaneous PET/MRI in pediatric lymphoma. Pediatr Radiol 2016;46:1258–68 doi:10.1007/s00247-016-3601-3 pmid:27003132

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Schmall JP,
   2. Surti S,
   3. Otero HJ, et al

   . Investigating low-dose image quality in whole-body pediatric (18)F-FDG scans using TOF-PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2021;62:123–30 doi:10.2967/jnumed.119.240127 pmid:32482791

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Kaplan S,
   2. Zhu YM

   . Full-dose PET image estimation from low-dose PET image using deep learning: a pilot study. J Digit Imaging 2019;32:773–78 doi:10.1007/s10278-018-0150-3 pmid:30402670

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Klenk C,
   2. Gawande R,
   3. Uslu L, et al

   . Ionising radiation-free whole-body MRI versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT scans for children and young adults with cancer: a prospective, non-randomised, single-centre study. Lancet Oncol 2014;15:275–85 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70021-X pmid:24559803

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Padma MV,
    2. Said S,
    3. Jacobs M, et al

    . Prediction of pathology and survival by FDG PET in gliomas. J Neurooncol 2003;64:227–37 doi:10.1023/A:1025665820001 pmid:14558598

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Ishiguchi H,
    2. Ito S,
    3. Kato K, et al

    . Diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging with background body suppression (DWIBS) in detection of lymph node and bone metastases from pediatric neuroblastoma. Ann Nucl Med 2018;32:348–62 doi:10.1007/s12149-018-1254-z pmid:29667143

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Maggialetti N,
    2. Ferrari C,
    3. Minoia C, et al

    . Role of WB-MR/DWIBS compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT in the therapy response assessment of lymphoma. Radiol Med 2016;121:132–43 doi:10.1007/s11547-015-0581-6 pmid:26349573

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Pareek A,
    2. Muehe AM,
    3. Theruvath

    AJ, et al. Whole-body PET/MRI of pediatric patients: the details that matter. J Vis Exp 2017;57128 doi:10.3791/57128 pmid:9286486

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Tudisca C,
    2. Nasoodi A,
    3. Fraioli F

    . PET-MRI: clinical application of the new hybrid technology. Nucl Med Commun 2015;36:666–78 doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000000312 pmid:25830717

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Brendle CB,
    2. Schmidt H,
    3. Fleischer S, et al

    . Simultaneously acquired MR/PET images compared with sequential MR/PET and PET/CT: alignment quality. Radiology 2013;268:190–99 doi:10.1148/radiol.13121838 pmid:23657890

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Broski SM,
    2. Goenka AH,
    3. Kemp BJ, et al

    . Clinical PET/MRI: 2018 Update. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018;211:295–313 doi:10.2214/AJR.18.20001 pmid:29949413

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Barkovich MJ,
    2. Xu D,
    3. Desikan RS, et al

    . Pediatric neuro MRI: tricks to minimize sedation. Pediatr Radiol 2018;48:50–55 doi:10.1007/s00247-017-3785-1 pmid:28432404

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Patel DM,
    2. Tubbs RS,
    3. Pate G, et al

    . Fast-sequence MRI studies for surveillance imaging in pediatric hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2014;13:440–47 doi:10.3171/2014.1.PEDS13447 pmid:24559278

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Ramgopal S,
    2. Karim SA,
    3. Subramanian S, et al

    . Rapid brain MRI protocols reduce head computerized tomography use in the pediatric emergency department. BMC Pediatr 2020;20:14 doi:10.1186/s12887-020-1919-3 pmid:31931764

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Andica C,
    2. Hagiwara A,
    3. Hori M, et al

    . Review of synthetic MRI in pediatric brains: Basic principle of MR quantification, its features, clinical applications, and limitations. J Neuroradiol 2019;46:268–75 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2019.02.005 pmid:30853545

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Haacke EM,
    2. Chen Y,
    3. Utriainen D, et al

    . STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE) imaging, part III: technical advances and clinical applications of a rapid multi-contrast multi-parametric brain imaging method. Magn Reson Imaging 2020;65:15–26 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2019.09.006 pmid:31629075

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Tanenbaum LN,
    2. Tsiouris AJ,
    3. Johnson AN, et al

    . Synthetic MRI for clinical neuroimaging: results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) prospective, multicenter, multireader trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1103–10 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5227 pmid:28450439

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    1. Siegel RL,
    2. Miller KD,
    3. Jemal A

    . Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020;70:7–30 doi:10.3322/caac.21590 pmid:31912902

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Langleben DD,
    2. Segall GM

    . PET in differentiation of recurrent brain tumor from radiation injury. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1861–67 pmid:11079496

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Love C,
    2. Tomas MB,
    3. Tronco GG, et al

    . FDG PET of infection and inflammation. Radiographics 2005;25:1357–68 doi:10.1148/rg.255045122 pmid:16160116

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Youland RS,
    2. Kitange GJ,
    3. Peterson TE, et al

    . The role of LAT1 in (18)F-DOPA uptake in malignant gliomas. J Neurooncol 2013;111:11–88 doi:10.1007/s11060-012-0986-1 pmid:23086431

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Lu X

    . The role of large neutral amino acid transporter (LAT1) in cancer. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 2019;19:863–76 doi:10.2174/1568009619666190802135714 pmid:31376820

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Dunet V,
    2. Rossier C,
    3. Buck A, et al

    . Performance of 18F-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET for the differential diagnosis of primary brain tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nucl Med 2012;53:207–14 doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.096859 pmid:22302961

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    1. Albano D,
    2. Tomasini D,
    3. Bonù M, et al

    . (18)F-fluciclovine ((18)F-FACBC) PET/CT or PET/MRI in gliomas/glioblastomas. Ann Nucl Med 2020;34:81–86 doi:10.1007/s12149-019-01426-w pmid:31773466

    CrossRefPubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Röhrich M,
    2. Huang K,
    3. Schrimpf D, et al

    . Integrated analysis of dynamic FET PET/CT parameters, histology, and methylation profiling of 44 gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018;45:1573–84 doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4009-0 pmid:29732524

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Zaragori T,
    2. Ginet M,
    3. Marie P-Y, et al

    . Use of static and dynamic [(18)F]-F-DOPA PET parameters for detecting patients with glioma recurrence or progression. EJNMMI Res 2020;10:56 doi:10.1186/s13550-020-00645-x pmid:32472232

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Marner L,
    2. Nysom K,
    3. Sehested A, et al

    . Early postoperative (18)F-FET PET/MRI for pediatric brain and spinal cord tumors. J Nucl Med 2019;60:1053–58 doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.220293 pmid:30683767

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Chiaravalloti A,
    2. Filippi L,
    3. Ricci M, et al

    . Molecular imaging in pediatric brain tumors. Cancers (Basel) 2019;11:1853 doi:10.3390/cancers11121853 pmid:31771237

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Utriainen M,
    2. Metsähonkala L,
    3. Salmi TT, et al

    . Metabolic characterization of childhood brain tumors: comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 11C-methionine positron emission tomography. Cancer 2002;95:1376–86 doi:10.1002/cncr.10798 pmid:12216107

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
35. 35.↵
    1. Bogsrud TV,
    2. Londalen A,
    3. Brandal P, et al

    . 18F-fluciclovine PET/CT in suspected residual or recurrent high-grade glioma. Clin Nucl Med 2019;44:605–11 doi:10.1097/RLU.0000000000002641 pmid:31274605

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Henderson F,
    2. Brem S,
    3. O’Rourke DM Jr., et al

    . (18)F-fluciclovine PET to distinguish treatment-related effects from disease progression in recurrent glioblastoma: PET fusion with MRI guides neurosurgical sampling. Neurooncol Pract 2020;7:152–57 doi:10.1093/nop/npz068 pmid:32206320

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Kondo A,
    2. Ishii H,
    3. Aoki S, et al

    . Phase IIa clinical study of [(18)F]fluciclovine: efficacy and safety of a new PET tracer for brain tumors. Ann Nucl Med 2016;30:608–18 doi:10.1007/s12149-016-1102-y pmid:27418267

    CrossRefPubMed
38. 38.↵
    1. Michaud L,
    2. Beattie BJ,
    3. Akhurst T, et al

    . 18 F-Fluciclovine (18 F-FACBC) PET imaging of recurrent brain tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020;47:1353–67 doi:10.1007/s00259-019-04433-1 pmid:31418054

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Kalemaki MS,
    2. Karantanas AH,
    3. Exarchos D, et al

    . PET/CT and PET/MRI in ophthalmic oncology (Review). Int J Oncol 2020;56:417–29 doi:10.3892/ijo.2020.4955 pmid:31939615

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Moll AC,
    2. Hoekstra OS,
    3. Imhof SM, et al

    . Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) to detect vital retinoblastoma in the eye: preliminary experience. Ophthalmic Genet 2004;25:31–35 doi:10.1076/opge.25.1.31.29001 pmid:15255112

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Pelak MJ,
    2. d’Amico A,
    3. Pecka KM

    . The prognostic usability of Ga68-DOTA-TATE PET-CT in irradiated meningioma. Neuro-Oncology 2016;18(Suppl 5):iv14–15 doi:10.1093/neuonc/now188.047

    CrossRef
42. 42.↵
    1. Dong Y,
    2. Zhang X,
    3. Wang S, et al

    . 18F-FDG PET/CT is useful in initial staging, restaging for pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;61:438–46 doi:10.23736/S1824-4785.17.02792-3 pmid:25996974

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Eugene T,
    2. Corradini N,
    3. Carlier T, et al

    . ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT in initial staging and assessment of early response to chemotherapy of pediatric rhabdomyosarcomas. Nucl Med Commun 2012;33:1089–95 doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e328356741f pmid:22929116

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Berthold F,
    2. Spix C,
    3. Kaatsch P, et al

    . Incidence, survival, and treatment of localized and metastatic neuroblastoma in Germany 1979-2015. Paediatr Drugs 2017;19:577–93 doi:10.1007/s40272-017-0251-3 pmid:28786082

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Bar-Sever Z,
    2. Biassoni L,
    3. Shulkin B, et al

    . Guidelines on nuclear medicine imaging in neuroblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018;45:2009–24 doi:10.1007/s00259-018-4070-8 pmid:29938300

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Mueller WP,
    2. Coppenrath E,
    3. Pfluger T

    . Nuclear medicine and multimodality imaging of pediatric neuroblastoma. Pediatr Radiol 2013;43:418–27 doi:10.1007/s00247-012-2512-1 pmid:23151727

    CrossRefPubMed
47. 47.↵
    1. Pfluger T,
    2. Schmied C,
    3. Porn U, et al

    . Integrated imaging using MRI and 123I metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy to improve sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of pediatric neuroblastoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1115–24 doi:10.2214/ajr.181.4.1811115 pmid:14500242

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
48. 48.↵
    1. Goo HW

    . Whole-body MRI of neuroblastoma. Eur J Radiol 2010;75:306–14 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.09.014 pmid:19781884

    CrossRefPubMed
49. 49.↵
    1. Aboian MS,
    2. Huang Sy,
    3. Hernandez-Pampaloni M, et al

    . I-MIBG PET-CT to monitor metastatic disease in children with relapsed neuroblastoma. J Nucl Med 2021;62:43–47 doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.243139 pmid:32414950

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
50. 50.↵
    1. Huang Sy,
    2. Bolch WE,
    3. Lee C, et al

    . Patient-specific dosimetry using pretherapy [(1)(2)(4)I]m-iodobenzylguanidine ([(1)(2)(4)I]mIBG) dynamic PET/CT imaging before [(1)(3)(1)I]mIBG targeted radionuclide therapy for neuroblastoma. Mol Imaging Biol 2015;17:284–94 doi:10.1007/s11307-014-0783-7 pmid:25145966

    CrossRefPubMed
51. 51.↵
    1. Papathanasiou ND,
    2. Gaze MN,
    3. Sullivan K, et al

    . 18F-FDG PET/CT and 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging in high-risk neuroblastoma: diagnostic comparison and survival analysis. J Nucl Med 2011;52:519–25 doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.083303 pmid:21421719

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
52. 52.↵
    1. Dhull VS,
    2. Sharma P,
    3. Patel C, et al

    . Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in paediatric neuroblastoma: comparison with 131I-MIBG scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun 2015;36:1007–13 doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000000347 pmid:26049371

    CrossRefPubMed
53. 53.↵
    1. Lopci E,
    2. Piccardo A,
    3. Nanni C, et al

    . 18F-DOPA PET/CT in neuroblastoma: comparison of conventional imaging with CT/MR. Clin Nucl Med 2012;37:e73–78 doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182485172 pmid:22391727

    CrossRefPubMed
54. 54.↵
    1. Piccardo A,
    2. Lopci E,
    3. Conte M, et al

    . Comparison of 18F-DOPA PET/CT and 123I-MIBG scintigraphy in stage 3 and 4 neuroblastoma: a pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39:57–71 doi:10.1007/s00259-011-1938-2 pmid:21932116

    CrossRefPubMed
55. 55.↵
    1. Piccardo A,
    2. Puntoni M,
    3. Lopci E, et al

    . Prognostic value of (1)(8)F-DOPA PET/CT at the time of recurrence in patients affected by neuroblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41:1046–56 doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2691-0 pmid:24562643

    CrossRefPubMed
56. 56.↵
    1. Pandit-Taskar N,
    2. Zanzonico P,
    3. Staton KD, et al

    . Biodistribution and dosimetry of (18)F-meta-fluorobenzylguanidine: a first-in-human PET/CT imaging study of patients with neuroendocrine malignancies. J Nucl Med 2018;59:147–53 doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.193169 pmid:28705916

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
57. 57.↵
    1. Zhang H,
    2. Huang R,
    3. Cheung NK, et al

    . Imaging the norepinephrine transporter in neuroblastoma: a comparison of [18F]-MFBG and 123I-MIBG. Clin Cancer Res 2014;20:2182–91 doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1153 pmid:24573553

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
58. 58.↵
    1. Gains JE,
    2. Aldridge MD,
    3. Mattoli MV, et al

    . 68Ga-DOTATATE and 123I-mIBG as imaging biomarkers of disease localisation in metastatic neuroblastoma: implications for molecular radiotherapy. Nucl Med Commun 2020;41:1169–77 doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000001265 pmid:32796449

    CrossRefPubMed
59. 59.↵
    1. Gains JE,
    2. Bomanji JB,
    3. Fersht NL, et al

    . 177Lu-DOTATATE molecular radiotherapy for childhood neuroblastoma. J Nucl Med 2011;52:1041–47 doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.085100 pmid:21680680

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
60. 60.↵
    1. Iakovou I,
    2. Giannoula E,
    3. Sachpekidis C

    . Imaging and imaging-based management of pediatric thyroid nodules. J Clin Med 2020;9:384 doi:10.3390/jcm9020384] pmid:32024056

    CrossRefPubMed
61. 61.↵
    1. Ilaslan H,
    2. Sundaram M,
    3. Unni KK, et al

    . Primary Ewing’s sarcoma of the vertebral column. Skeletal Radiol 2004;33:506–13 doi:10.1007/s00256-004-0810-x pmid:15232658

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
62. 62.↵
    1. Lyons K,
    2. Seghers V,
    3. Sorensen JIL, et al

    . Comparison of standardized uptake values in normal structures between PET/CT and PET/MRI in a tertiary pediatric hospital: a prospective study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;205:1094–101 doi:10.2214/AJR.15.14304 pmid:26496558

    CrossRefPubMed
63. 63.↵
    1. Sher AC,
    2. Seghers V,
    3. Paldino MJ, et al

    . Assessment of sequential PET/MRI in comparison with PET/CT of pediatric lymphoma: a prospective study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;206:623–31 doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15083 pmid:26901021

    CrossRefPubMed
64. 64.↵
    1. Hirsch FW,
    2. Sattler B,
    3. Sorge I, et al

    . PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner. Pediatr Radiol 2013;43:860–75 doi:10.1007/s00247-012-2570-4 pmid:23306377

    CrossRefPubMed
65. 65.↵
    1. Jessop S,
    2. Crudgington D,
    3. London K, et al

    . FDG PET-CT in pediatric Langerhans cell histiocytosis. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2020;67:e28034 doi:10.1002/pbc.28034 pmid:31599488

    CrossRefPubMed
66. 66.↵
    1. Wang GL,
    2. Zhao K,
    3. Liu ZF, et al

    . A meta-analysis of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography versus scintigraphy in the evaluation of suspected osteomyelitis. Nucl Med Commun 2011;32:1134–42 doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834b455c pmid:21934545

    CrossRefPubMed
67. 67.↵
    1. Kouijzer IJE,
    2. Scheper H,
    3. de Rooy JWJ, et al

    . The diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG-PET/CT and MRI in suspected vertebral osteomyelitis: a prospective study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018;45:798–805 doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3912-0 pmid:29256136

    CrossRefPubMed
68. 68.↵
    1. Termaat MF,
    2. Raijmakers PG,
    3. Scholten HJ, et al

    . The accuracy of diagnostic imaging for the assessment of chronic osteomyelitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:2464–71 doi:10.2106/JBJS.D.02691 pmid:16264122

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
69. 69.↵
    1. Demirev A,
    2. Weijers R,
    3. Geurts J, et al

    . Comparison of [18 F]FDG PET/CT and MRI in the diagnosis of active osteomyelitis. Skeletal Radiol 2014;43:665–72 doi:10.1007/s00256-014-1844-3 pmid:24609810

    CrossRefPubMed
70. 70.↵
    1. Hulsen DJ,
    2. Geurts J,
    3. Arts JJ, et al

    . Hybrid FDG-PET/MR imaging of chronic osteomyelitis: a prospective case series. Eur J Hybrid Imaging 2019;3:7 doi:10.1186/s41824-019-0055-5 pmid:34191175

    CrossRefPubMed
71. 71.↵
    1. Jager PL,
    2. Chirakal R,
    3. Marriott CJ, et al

    . 6-L-18F-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine PET in neuroendocrine tumors: basic aspects and emerging clinical applications. J Nucl Med 2008;49:573–86 doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.045708 pmid:18344441

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
72. 72.↵
    1. de Lonlay P,
    2. Simon-Carre A,
    3. Ribeiro MJ, et al

    . Congenital hyperinsulinism: pancreatic [18F]fluoro-L-dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) positron emission tomography and immunohistochemistry study of DOPA decarboxylase and insulin secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:933–40 doi:10.1210/jc.2005-1713 pmid:16403819

    CrossRefPubMed
73. 73.↵
    1. Mohnike K,
    2. Blankenstein O,
    3. Minn H, et al

    . [18F]-DOPA positron emission tomography for preoperative localization in congenital hyperinsulinism. Horm Res 2008;70:65–72 doi:10.1159/000137655 pmid:18547951

    CrossRefPubMed
74. 74.↵
    1. Ribeiro MJ,
    2. Boddaert N,
    3. Bellanné-Chantelot C, et al

    . The added value of [18F]fluoro-L-DOPA PET in the diagnosis of hyperinsulinism of infancy: a retrospective study involving 49 children. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:2120–28 doi:10.1007/s00259-007-0498-y pmid:17661030

    CrossRefPubMed