A Piepsz1, M Tondeur, H Ham. 1. Department of Radioisotopes, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Saint-Pierre Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to estimate the reproducibility and accuracy of 99mTc-mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) relative percentage uptake. METHODS: Reproducibility was evaluated on healthy volunteers who were submitted twice to a 99mTc-MAG3 renographic study, which used different uptake algorithms, different background corrections and different time intervals. Accuracy was evaluated in a group of patients with symmetrical or asymmetrical relative renal function, who underwent both 99mTc-dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) and 99mTc-MAG3 studies, using the DMSA relative percentage uptake as a reference. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The methods that combined the best reproducibility and accuracy for estimating 99mTc-MAG3 left-to-right uptake ratio were the integral method, with subrenal or perirenal background correction, and the Patlak-Rutland plot. The use of the integral method without background correction introduced a systematic bias, whereas the slope method resulted in high variability. Therefore these methods cannot be recommended.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to estimate the reproducibility and accuracy of 99mTc-mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) relative percentage uptake. METHODS: Reproducibility was evaluated on healthy volunteers who were submitted twice to a 99mTc-MAG3 renographic study, which used different uptake algorithms, different background corrections and different time intervals. Accuracy was evaluated in a group of patients with symmetrical or asymmetrical relative renal function, who underwent both 99mTc-dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) and 99mTc-MAG3 studies, using the DMSA relative percentage uptake as a reference. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The methods that combined the best reproducibility and accuracy for estimating 99mTc-MAG3 left-to-right uptake ratio were the integral method, with subrenal or perirenal background correction, and the Patlak-Rutland plot. The use of the integral method without background correction introduced a systematic bias, whereas the slope method resulted in high variability. Therefore these methods cannot be recommended.
Authors: Michal J Wesolowski; Gary R Conrad; Martin Šámal; Gage Watson; Surajith N Wanasundara; Paul Babyn; Carl A Wesolowski Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 9.236