@article{LueckerathLapaMalzahnetal.2014,
  author    = {L{\"u}ckerath, Katharina and Lapa, Constantin and Malzahn, Uwe and Samnick, Samuel and Einsele, Herrmann and Buck, Andreas K. and Herrmann, Ken and Knop, Stefan},
  title     = {18FDG-PET/CT for prognostic stratification of patients with multiple myeloma relapse after stem cell transplantation},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-113107},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in 37 patients with a history of multiple myeloma (MM) and suspected or confirmed recurrence after stem cell transplantation (SCT). All patients had been heavily pre-treated. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were correlated to a number of different PET-derived as well as clinical parameters. Impact on patient management was assessed. Absence of FDG-avid MM foci was a positive prognostic factor for both TTP and OS (p<0.01). Presence of >10 focal lesions correlated with both TTP (p<0.01) and OS (p<0.05). Interestingly, presence of >10 lesions in the appendicular skeleton proved to have the strongest association with disease progression. Intensity of glucose uptake and presence of extramedullary disease were associated with shorter TTP (p=0.037 and p=0.049, respectively). Manifestations in soft tissue structures turned out to be a strong negative predictor for both, TTP and OS (p<0.01, respectively). PET resulted in a change of management in 30\% of patients. Our data underline the prognostic value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in MM patients also in the setting of post-SCT relapse. PET/CT has a significant impact on patient management.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GrebeMalzahnDonhauseretal.2020,
  author    = {Grebe, S{\"o}ren Jendrik and Malzahn, Uwe and Donhauser, Julian and Liu, Dan and Wanner, Christoph and Krane, Vera and Hammer, Fabian},
  title     = {Quantification of left ventricular mass by echocardiography compared to cardiac magnet resonance imaging in hemodialysis patients},
  series = {Cardiovascular Ultrasound},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Cardiovascular Ultrasound},
  doi       = {10.1186/s12947-020-00217-y},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229282},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Background: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), defined by the left ventricular mass index (LVMI), is highly prevalent in hemodialysis patients and a strong independent predictor of cardiovascular events. Compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), echocardiography tends to overestimate the LVMI. Here, we evaluate the diagnostic performance of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared to CMR regarding the assessment of LVMI in hemodialysis patients. Methods: TTR and CMR data for 95 hemodialysis patients who participated in the MiREnDa trial were analyzed. The LVMI was calculated by two-dimensional (2D) TTE-guided M-mode measurements employing the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) and Teichholz (Th) formulas, which were compared to the reference method, CMR. Results: LVH was present in 44\% of patients based on LVMI measured by CMR. LVMI measured by echocardiography correlated moderately with CMR, ASE: r = 0.44 (0.34-0.62); Th: r = 0.44 (0.32-0.62). Compared to CMR, both echocardiographic formulas overestimated LVMI (mean increment LVMI (ASE-CMR): 19.5 +/- 19.48 g/m(2),p < 0.001; mean increment LVMI (Th-CMR): 15.9 +/- 15.89 g/m(2),p < 0.001). We found greater LVMI overestimation in patients with LVH using the ASE formula compared to the Th formula. Stratification of patients into CMR LVMI quartiles showed a continuous decrease in increment LVMI with increasing CMR LVMI quartiles for the Th formula (p < 0.001) but not for the ASE formula (p = 0.772). Bland-Altman analysis showed that the Th formula had a constant bias independent of LVMI. Both methods had good discrimination ability for the detection of LVH (ROC-AUC: 0.819 (0.737-0.901) and 0.808 (0.723-0.892) for Th and ASE, respectively). Conclusions: The ASE and Th formulas overestimate LVMI in hemodialysis patients. However, the overestimation is less with the Th formula, particularly with increasing LVMI. The results suggest that the Th formula should be preferred for measurement of LVMI in chronic hemodialysis patients.},
  language  = {en}
}