Cargando…

Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements

BACKGROUND: In nuclear medicine, liquid radiopharmaceuticals for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes are administered to patients by using various types of syringes with different volumes. The activity of each "dose" must be carefully measured and documented prior to administration using an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Strigari, Lidia, Benassi, Marcello, De Felice, Pierino, D'Andrea, Marco, Fazio, Aldo, Nocentini, Sandro, d'Angelo, Annelisa, Ceccatelli, Alessia
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2474841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18593458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-9966-27-14
_version_ 1782157508184375296
author Strigari, Lidia
Benassi, Marcello
De Felice, Pierino
D'Andrea, Marco
Fazio, Aldo
Nocentini, Sandro
d'Angelo, Annelisa
Ceccatelli, Alessia
author_facet Strigari, Lidia
Benassi, Marcello
De Felice, Pierino
D'Andrea, Marco
Fazio, Aldo
Nocentini, Sandro
d'Angelo, Annelisa
Ceccatelli, Alessia
author_sort Strigari, Lidia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In nuclear medicine, liquid radiopharmaceuticals for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes are administered to patients by using various types of syringes with different volumes. The activity of each "dose" must be carefully measured and documented prior to administration using an activity calibrator. METHODS: Calibrator response is a function of the measurement geometry and, in particular, it depends on the syringe type and filling volume. To minimize the uncertainty associated with the measured activity of the syringe, it is necessary to calculate a calibration curve depending on filling volume for each syringe type. This curve can be obtained by fitting experimentally determined volume correction factors. RESULTS: A theoretical evaluation of volume correction factors for syringes is reported for three different experimental methods. The aim is to determine the most accurate experimental method among those considered, by examining the expression of uncertainty for the correction factor. This theoretical analysis was then tested experimentally. CONCLUSION: The agreement between the experimental data obtained in the constant activity method and gravimetric method at constant specific activity and the small associated uncertainties show the accuracy of these two procedures; while the volumetric method at constant specific activity could lead to a wrong evaluation of the correction factors.
format Text
id pubmed-2474841
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24748412008-07-21 Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements Strigari, Lidia Benassi, Marcello De Felice, Pierino D'Andrea, Marco Fazio, Aldo Nocentini, Sandro d'Angelo, Annelisa Ceccatelli, Alessia J Exp Clin Cancer Res Research BACKGROUND: In nuclear medicine, liquid radiopharmaceuticals for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes are administered to patients by using various types of syringes with different volumes. The activity of each "dose" must be carefully measured and documented prior to administration using an activity calibrator. METHODS: Calibrator response is a function of the measurement geometry and, in particular, it depends on the syringe type and filling volume. To minimize the uncertainty associated with the measured activity of the syringe, it is necessary to calculate a calibration curve depending on filling volume for each syringe type. This curve can be obtained by fitting experimentally determined volume correction factors. RESULTS: A theoretical evaluation of volume correction factors for syringes is reported for three different experimental methods. The aim is to determine the most accurate experimental method among those considered, by examining the expression of uncertainty for the correction factor. This theoretical analysis was then tested experimentally. CONCLUSION: The agreement between the experimental data obtained in the constant activity method and gravimetric method at constant specific activity and the small associated uncertainties show the accuracy of these two procedures; while the volumetric method at constant specific activity could lead to a wrong evaluation of the correction factors. BioMed Central 2008-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2474841/ /pubmed/18593458 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-9966-27-14 Text en Copyright © 2008 Strigari et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Strigari, Lidia
Benassi, Marcello
De Felice, Pierino
D'Andrea, Marco
Fazio, Aldo
Nocentini, Sandro
d'Angelo, Annelisa
Ceccatelli, Alessia
Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title_full Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title_fullStr Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title_short Comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
title_sort comparison of methods to determine accurate dose calibrator activity measurements
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2474841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18593458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1756-9966-27-14
work_keys_str_mv AT strigarilidia comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT benassimarcello comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT defelicepierino comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT dandreamarco comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT fazioaldo comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT nocentinisandro comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT dangeloannelisa comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements
AT ceccatellialessia comparisonofmethodstodetermineaccuratedosecalibratoractivitymeasurements