Determination of Breast-Absorbed Dose Using Conjugated View Method in Patients Undergoing Perfusion Scan with Radiotracer 99mTc-sestamibi

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 MSc Student, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Internal dosimetry in nuclear medicine is very important for assessing the benefits of the used method against its risks. The absorbed dose of injected radiopharmaceutical is determined by several different methods. The aim of this study was to determine the absorbed dose of the breast using the software Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRD) and to compare it with the computer-simulation software [quoted] in some authentic articles.Methods: 22 females were posed to gamma camera at intervals of 15, 60 and 90 minutes after injection of the radiopharmaceutical 99mTC-sestamibi, and scanned. Radiotracer based on activity was performed using conjugated-view method. The breast dose was calculated using MIRD formula. The quantitative data of dosimetry were analyzed via SPSS software.Findings: The breast activity in 15, 60 and 90 minutes after injection of the radiopharmaceutical was calculated as 0.234 ± 0.076, 0.17± 0.053 and 0.134 ± 0.053 mCi, respectively. By drawing graphs of the activity over time using Excel software, we witnessed a decline of the graph. The average amount of radiopharmaceutical uptake by heart was then calculated as 3.065 ± 0.327 percent.Conclusion: The results of this study were not in good agreement whit valid studies. So, the conjugated view method is not an accurate approach for organ activity quantification in myocardial perfusion scan.

Keywords

References

  1. Moslehi M, Shanei A, Hakimian SM, Mahmoudi G, Baradaran-Ghahfarokhi M. (99m) Tc-Phytate Lymphoscintigraphy for detection of sentinel node: preliminary results of the first year's clinical experience in Isfahan, Iran. J Med Signals Sens 2015; 5(1): 69-74.
  2. Asadi Z, Esmaeilinasab M, Yaghobi N, Ansarifar A. Comparison of the effect of written, figurative and written-figurative training package of myocardial perfusion imaging on patients' cooperation. J Cardiovasc Nursing 2014; 3(1): 18-25.
  3. Mozaffarinia K, Yazdekhasti F, Abtahi HR. The levels of serum chromium and manganese in patients with idiopathic tinnitus compared with healthy individuals. J Isfahan Med Sch 2015; 33(340): 983-91. [In Persian].
  4. Chang SM, Nabi F, Xu J, Raza U, Mahmarian JJ. Normal stress-only versus standard stress/rest myocardial perfusion imaging: similar patient mortality with reduced radiation exposure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55(3): 221-30.
  5. Shanei A, Afshin M, Moslehi M, Rastaghi S. Estimation of Organ activity using four different methods of background correction in conjugate view method. J Med Signals Sens 2015; 5(4): 253-8.
  6. Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Cheki M, Moslehi M. Estimation of organ absorbed doses in patients from (99m)tc-diphosphonate using the data of MIRDose software. J Med Signals Sens 2012; 2(4): 231-4.
  7. Stabin MG. Regulatory aspects of dose calculations. In: Stabin MG, Editor. Fundamentals of Nuclear Medicine Dosimetry. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media; 2008. p. 201-20.
  8. Stabin MG, Sparks RB, Crowe E. OLINDA/EXM: the second-generation personal computer software for internal dose assessment in nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med 2005; 46(6): 1023-7.
  9. Siegel JA, Thomas SR, Stubbs JB, Stabin MG, Hays MT, Koral KF, et al. MIRD pamphlet no. 16: Techniques for quantitative radiopharmaceutical biodistribution data acquisition and analysis for use in human radiation dose estimates. J Nucl Med 1999; 40(2): 37S-61S.
  10. Pereira JM, Stabin MG, Lima FR, Guimaraes MI, Forrester JW. Image quantification for radiation dose calculations--limitations and uncertainties. Health Phys 2010; 99(5): 688-701.
  11. Norrgren K, Svegborn SL, Areberg J, Mattsson S. Accuracy of the quantification of organ activity from planar gamma camera images. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2003; 18(1): 125-31.
  12. Moslehi M, Shanei A, Mahmoudi G. Peaceful utilization of nuclear energy in Iran: detection of sentinel node in breast cancer patients using technetium element. Mediterr J Soc Sci 2015; 6(1): 643-47.
  13. Durand E, Prigent A. The basics of renal imaging and function studies. Q J Nucl Med 2002; 46(4): 249-67.
  14. Jentzen W, Schneider E, Freudenberg L, Eising EG, Gorges R, Muller SP, et al. Relationship between cumulative radiation dose and salivary gland uptake associated with radioiodine therapy of thyroid cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2006; 27(8): 669-76.
  15. Fleming JS. A technique for the absolute measurement of activity using a gamma camera and computer. Phys Med Biol 1979; 24(1): 176-80.
  16. Gonzalez-Vazquez A, Ferro-Flores G, Arteaga de Murphy C, Gutierrez-Garcia Z. Biokinetics and dosimetry in patients of 99mTc-EDDA/HYNIC-Tyr3-octreotide prepared from lyophilized kits. Appl Radiat Isot 2006; 64(7): 792-7.
  17. Okada RD, Glover D, Gaffney T, Williams S. Myocardial kinetics of technetium-99m-hexakis-2-methoxy-2-methylpropyl-isonitrile. Circulation 1988; 77(2): 491-8.
  18. Helal N. Patient organs dose calculations in nuclear medicine. Int J Res Rev Appl Sci 2012; 11(1): 153-61.
  19. Stabin MG, Stubbs JB, Toohey RE. Radiation dose estimates for radiopharmaceuticals (NUREG/CR-6345) [Online]. [cited 1996]; Available from: URL: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ nuregs/contract/cr6345/
  20. Vanzetto G, Fagret D, Ghezzi C. Tc-99m N-NOET: Chronicle of a unique perfusion imaging agent and a missed opportunity? J Nucl Cardiol 2004; 11(6): 647-50.
  21. Stabin MG. Radiopharmaceuticals for nuclear cardiology: radiation dosimetry, uncertainties, and risk. J Nucl Med 2008; 49(9): 1555-63.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 34, Issue 397 - Serial Number 397
July and August 2016
Pages 1038-1043

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 13 June 2016
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics