Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Comparison of planar DMSA scan with an evaluation based on SPECT imaging in the split renal function assessment

D. Chroustová, J. Trnka, V. Šírová, I. Urbanová, J. Langer, J. Kubinyi,

. 2016 ; 19 (1) : 12-7.

Jazyk angličtina Země Polsko

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc17000536

BACKGROUND: Validation of the 99mTc-DMSA planar scintigraphy accuracy for split renal function assessment and comparison with evaluation based on SPECT imaging both with and without CT attenuation correction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For split renal function assessment two methods were used: A) planar scintigraphy based on anterior and posterior projections using correction for kidney depth calculated by the geometric mean; B) semi-quantitative evaluation based on SPECT (B1) and attenuation-corrected SPECT/CT (B2) images using locally developed software for kidney segmentation and voxel-based analysis. All three methods were performed with a phantom simulating body including pair of kidneys. For patient study methods A and B1 were applied on a group of 140 children and adolescents with various renal diseases. Renal function ratios were compared both mutually and with physically measured activity ratios in the phantom. RESULTS: Method A provided results which were closest to measured reference values (average absolute difference of 0.9 percentage points [pp]). Method B1 was noticeably worse (2.1pp), whereas attenuation correction (B2) improved tomography results considerably (1.3 pp). The superiority of planar imaging could be caused among others by differences in creation of planar range of interest compared to tomographic volume of interest. However all the differences were under the threshold of any clinical importance. The comparison between method A and B1 based on patient study also showed differences mostly of none clinical importance. CONCLUSION: Routine evaluation of split renal function using planar technique with correction of the kidney depth is at least equivalent to tomographic evaluation, and there is no need to update the established clinical practice.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc17000536
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20180409080356.0
007      
ta
008      
170103s2016 pl f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.5603/NMR.2016.0003 $2 doi
024    7_
$a 10.5603/NMR.2016.0003 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)26841374
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a pl
100    1_
$a Chroustová, Daniela $u Department of Nuclear Medicine, General University Hospital and First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague,. Daniela.Chroustova@vfn.cz.
245    10
$a Comparison of planar DMSA scan with an evaluation based on SPECT imaging in the split renal function assessment / $c D. Chroustová, J. Trnka, V. Šírová, I. Urbanová, J. Langer, J. Kubinyi,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Validation of the 99mTc-DMSA planar scintigraphy accuracy for split renal function assessment and comparison with evaluation based on SPECT imaging both with and without CT attenuation correction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For split renal function assessment two methods were used: A) planar scintigraphy based on anterior and posterior projections using correction for kidney depth calculated by the geometric mean; B) semi-quantitative evaluation based on SPECT (B1) and attenuation-corrected SPECT/CT (B2) images using locally developed software for kidney segmentation and voxel-based analysis. All three methods were performed with a phantom simulating body including pair of kidneys. For patient study methods A and B1 were applied on a group of 140 children and adolescents with various renal diseases. Renal function ratios were compared both mutually and with physically measured activity ratios in the phantom. RESULTS: Method A provided results which were closest to measured reference values (average absolute difference of 0.9 percentage points [pp]). Method B1 was noticeably worse (2.1pp), whereas attenuation correction (B2) improved tomography results considerably (1.3 pp). The superiority of planar imaging could be caused among others by differences in creation of planar range of interest compared to tomographic volume of interest. However all the differences were under the threshold of any clinical importance. The comparison between method A and B1 based on patient study also showed differences mostly of none clinical importance. CONCLUSION: Routine evaluation of split renal function using planar technique with correction of the kidney depth is at least equivalent to tomographic evaluation, and there is no need to update the established clinical practice.
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a dítě $7 D002648
650    _2
$a předškolní dítě $7 D002675
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a vyšetření funkce ledvin $x metody $7 D007677
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a fantomy radiodiagnostické $7 D019047
650    12
$a technecium 99mTc dimerkaptojantarová kyselina $7 D019783
650    _2
$a jednofotonová emisní výpočetní tomografie $x metody $7 D015899
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Trnka, Jirí
700    1_
$a Šírová, Věra $7 xx0223106
700    1_
$a Urbanová, Ivana
700    1_
$a Langer, Jan
700    1_
$a Kubinyi, Jozef
773    0_
$w MED00156551 $t Nuclear medicine review. Central & Eastern Europe $x 1644-4345 $g Roč. 19, č. 1 (2016), s. 12-7
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26841374 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20170103 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20180409080443 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1179676 $s 961103
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2016 $b 19 $c 1 $d 12-7 $i 1644-4345 $m Nuclear Medicine Review $n Nucl. Med. Rev. $x MED00156551
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20170103

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...