Cargando…

Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods

To improve the accuracy of the activity quantification and the image quality in scintigraphy, scatter correction is a vital procedure. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy in calculation of absorbed dose to patients following bone scan with (99m)Tc-marked diphosphonates ((99m)Tc-MDP) by...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush, Damoori, Mehri, Tavakoli, Mohammad Bagher, Moslehi, Masoud
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4786961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27014610
_version_ 1782420629244346368
author Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush
Damoori, Mehri
Tavakoli, Mohammad Bagher
Moslehi, Masoud
author_facet Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush
Damoori, Mehri
Tavakoli, Mohammad Bagher
Moslehi, Masoud
author_sort Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush
collection PubMed
description To improve the accuracy of the activity quantification and the image quality in scintigraphy, scatter correction is a vital procedure. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy in calculation of absorbed dose to patients following bone scan with (99m)Tc-marked diphosphonates ((99m)Tc-MDP) by two different methods of background correction in conjugate view method. This study involved 22 patients referring to the Nuclear Medicine Center of Shahid Chamran Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After the injection of (99m)Tc-MDP, whole-body images from patients were acquired at 10, 60, 90, and 180 min. Organ activities were calculated using the conjugate view method by Buijs and conventional background correction. Finally, the absorbed dose was calculated using the Medical Internal Radiation Dosimetry (MIRD) technique. The results of this study showed that the absorbed dose per unit of injected activity (rad/mCi) ± standard deviation for pelvis bone, bladder, and kidneys by Buijs method was 0.19 ± 0.05, 0.08 ± 0.01, and 0.03 ± 0.01 and by conventional method was 0.13 ± 0.04, 0.08 ± 0.01, and 0.024 ± 0.01, respectively. This showed that Buijs background correction method had a high accuracy compared to conventional method for the estimated absorbed dose of bone and kidneys whereas, for the bladder, its accuracy was low.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4786961
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47869612016-03-24 Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush Damoori, Mehri Tavakoli, Mohammad Bagher Moslehi, Masoud J Med Signals Sens Original Article To improve the accuracy of the activity quantification and the image quality in scintigraphy, scatter correction is a vital procedure. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy in calculation of absorbed dose to patients following bone scan with (99m)Tc-marked diphosphonates ((99m)Tc-MDP) by two different methods of background correction in conjugate view method. This study involved 22 patients referring to the Nuclear Medicine Center of Shahid Chamran Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. After the injection of (99m)Tc-MDP, whole-body images from patients were acquired at 10, 60, 90, and 180 min. Organ activities were calculated using the conjugate view method by Buijs and conventional background correction. Finally, the absorbed dose was calculated using the Medical Internal Radiation Dosimetry (MIRD) technique. The results of this study showed that the absorbed dose per unit of injected activity (rad/mCi) ± standard deviation for pelvis bone, bladder, and kidneys by Buijs method was 0.19 ± 0.05, 0.08 ± 0.01, and 0.03 ± 0.01 and by conventional method was 0.13 ± 0.04, 0.08 ± 0.01, and 0.024 ± 0.01, respectively. This showed that Buijs background correction method had a high accuracy compared to conventional method for the estimated absorbed dose of bone and kidneys whereas, for the bladder, its accuracy was low. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4786961/ /pubmed/27014610 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Journal of Medical Signals & Sensors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Shahbazi-Gahrouei, Daryoush
Damoori, Mehri
Tavakoli, Mohammad Bagher
Moslehi, Masoud
Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title_full Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title_fullStr Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title_short Comparison of Accuracy in Calculation of Absorbed Dose to Patients Following Bone Scan with (99m)Tc-Marked Diphosphonates by Two Different Background Correction Methods
title_sort comparison of accuracy in calculation of absorbed dose to patients following bone scan with (99m)tc-marked diphosphonates by two different background correction methods
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4786961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27014610
work_keys_str_mv AT shahbazigahroueidaryoush comparisonofaccuracyincalculationofabsorbeddosetopatientsfollowingbonescanwith99mtcmarkeddiphosphonatesbytwodifferentbackgroundcorrectionmethods
AT damoorimehri comparisonofaccuracyincalculationofabsorbeddosetopatientsfollowingbonescanwith99mtcmarkeddiphosphonatesbytwodifferentbackgroundcorrectionmethods
AT tavakolimohammadbagher comparisonofaccuracyincalculationofabsorbeddosetopatientsfollowingbonescanwith99mtcmarkeddiphosphonatesbytwodifferentbackgroundcorrectionmethods
AT moslehimasoud comparisonofaccuracyincalculationofabsorbeddosetopatientsfollowingbonescanwith99mtcmarkeddiphosphonatesbytwodifferentbackgroundcorrectionmethods