Table 1.
Characteristics of study subjects.
Fig 1.
Typical images of 18FDG-PET/CT and IRT.
Typical images of 18FDG-PET/CT in BAT-negative (A) and positive subjects (B). Typical images of IRT method in BAT-negative (C) and positive subjects (D) before (left) and after 2-h cold exposure (right).
Fig 2.
Skin temperature changes after cold exposure and hand immersion.
Tscv, skin temperature of the supraclavicular region; Tc, skin temperature of the chest region; Δtemp, differences between Tscv and Tc. Tscv (A), Tc (B), and Δtemp (C) during cold exposure. Tscv (D), Tc (E), and Δtemp (F) during hand immersion. * vs 27°C or 0 m.
Fig 3.
Relationship between log SUVmax and Δtemp in the cold exposure test (A) and the hand immersion test (B). Δtemp, difference between skin temperature on the supraclavicular region (Tscv) and that on the chest region (Tc); SUVmax, maximal standardized uptake value. The correlation coefficient in the cold exposure test (r = 0.74) was significantly higher than that in the hand immersion test (r = 0.42) (P < 0.05). Data were obtained from both the right and left sides in 24 subjects.
Table 2.
Correlation coefficients between IRT parameters and SUVmax in the cold exposure test.
Table 3.
The correlation coefficient between Δtemp and possible confounding factors.
Table 4.
Correlation coefficients between IRT parameters and SUVmax in the hand immersion test.
Table 5.
Accuracy for brown adipose tissue activity during cold exposure.