Cargando…
Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures
INTRODUCTION: Ventilation/Perfusion (V/Q) PET/CT is an emerging imaging modality for regional lung function evaluation. The same carrier molecules as conventional V/Q scintigraphy are used but they are radiolabelled with gallium-68 ((68)Ga) instead of technetium-99m ((99m)Tc). A recurrent concern re...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9747754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36530884 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1051249 |
_version_ | 1784849673048031232 |
---|---|
author | Blanc-Béguin, Frédérique Damien, Pascal Floch, Romain Kerleguer, Kévin Hennebicq, Simon Robin, Philippe Salaün, Pierre-Yves Le Roux, Pierre-Yves |
author_facet | Blanc-Béguin, Frédérique Damien, Pascal Floch, Romain Kerleguer, Kévin Hennebicq, Simon Robin, Philippe Salaün, Pierre-Yves Le Roux, Pierre-Yves |
author_sort | Blanc-Béguin, Frédérique |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Ventilation/Perfusion (V/Q) PET/CT is an emerging imaging modality for regional lung function evaluation. The same carrier molecules as conventional V/Q scintigraphy are used but they are radiolabelled with gallium-68 ((68)Ga) instead of technetium-99m ((99m)Tc). A recurrent concern regarding V/Q PET imaging is the radiation dose to the healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the total effective dose and the finger dose received by the technologist when performing a V/Q PET procedure, and to compare them with the radiations doses received with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, FDG PET and Ga DOTATOC PET procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The whole body dose measurement was performed 10 times for each of the evaluated procedures using an electronic personal dosimeter (ED). For V/Q PET and V/Q scintigraphy procedures, ventilation and perfusion stages were separately evaluated. Internal exposure was measured for ventilation procedures. Finger dose measurements were performed 5 times for each of the PET procedures using Thermoluminescence (TL) pellets. RESULTS: The technologist effective dose when performing a V/Q PET procedure was 2.83 ± 0.67 μSv, as compared with 1.16 ± 0.34 μSv for conventional V/Q scintigraphy, 2.13 ± 0.77 μSv for [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTATOC, and 2.86 ± 1.79 μSv for FDG PET procedures, respectively. The finger dose for the V/Q PET procedure was similar to the dose for a [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTATOC scan (0.35 mSv and 0.32 mSv, respectively). CONCLUSION: The technologist total effective dose for a V/Q PET procedure is ~2.4 higher than the dose for a conventional V/Q scintigraphy, but in the same range than the radiation exposure when performing common PET procedures, both in terms of total effective dose or finger dose. These results should be reassuring for the healthcare workers performing a V/Q PET procedure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9747754 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97477542022-12-15 Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures Blanc-Béguin, Frédérique Damien, Pascal Floch, Romain Kerleguer, Kévin Hennebicq, Simon Robin, Philippe Salaün, Pierre-Yves Le Roux, Pierre-Yves Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine INTRODUCTION: Ventilation/Perfusion (V/Q) PET/CT is an emerging imaging modality for regional lung function evaluation. The same carrier molecules as conventional V/Q scintigraphy are used but they are radiolabelled with gallium-68 ((68)Ga) instead of technetium-99m ((99m)Tc). A recurrent concern regarding V/Q PET imaging is the radiation dose to the healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the total effective dose and the finger dose received by the technologist when performing a V/Q PET procedure, and to compare them with the radiations doses received with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, FDG PET and Ga DOTATOC PET procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The whole body dose measurement was performed 10 times for each of the evaluated procedures using an electronic personal dosimeter (ED). For V/Q PET and V/Q scintigraphy procedures, ventilation and perfusion stages were separately evaluated. Internal exposure was measured for ventilation procedures. Finger dose measurements were performed 5 times for each of the PET procedures using Thermoluminescence (TL) pellets. RESULTS: The technologist effective dose when performing a V/Q PET procedure was 2.83 ± 0.67 μSv, as compared with 1.16 ± 0.34 μSv for conventional V/Q scintigraphy, 2.13 ± 0.77 μSv for [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTATOC, and 2.86 ± 1.79 μSv for FDG PET procedures, respectively. The finger dose for the V/Q PET procedure was similar to the dose for a [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTATOC scan (0.35 mSv and 0.32 mSv, respectively). CONCLUSION: The technologist total effective dose for a V/Q PET procedure is ~2.4 higher than the dose for a conventional V/Q scintigraphy, but in the same range than the radiation exposure when performing common PET procedures, both in terms of total effective dose or finger dose. These results should be reassuring for the healthcare workers performing a V/Q PET procedure. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9747754/ /pubmed/36530884 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1051249 Text en Copyright © 2022 Blanc-Béguin, Damien, Floch, Kerleguer, Hennebicq, Robin, Salaün and Le Roux. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Medicine Blanc-Béguin, Frédérique Damien, Pascal Floch, Romain Kerleguer, Kévin Hennebicq, Simon Robin, Philippe Salaün, Pierre-Yves Le Roux, Pierre-Yves Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title | Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title_full | Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title_fullStr | Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title_full_unstemmed | Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title_short | Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a V/Q PET: Comparison with conventional V/Q scintigraphy, [(18)F]FDG PET and [(68)Ga]Ga DOTATOC PET procedures |
title_sort | radiation exposure to nuclear medicine technologists performing a v/q pet: comparison with conventional v/q scintigraphy, [(18)f]fdg pet and [(68)ga]ga dotatoc pet procedures |
topic | Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9747754/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36530884 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1051249 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT blancbeguinfrederique radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT damienpascal radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT flochromain radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT kerleguerkevin radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT hennebicqsimon radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT robinphilippe radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT salaunpierreyves radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures AT lerouxpierreyves radiationexposuretonuclearmedicinetechnologistsperformingavqpetcomparisonwithconventionalvqscintigraphy18ffdgpetand68gagadotatocpetprocedures |