UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to see whether oral administration of (18)F-FDG could be substituted-without significant loss of information-for intravenous injection of (18)F-FDG in patients with difficult intravenous access of any cause, such as that often seen in cancer patients after many cycles of chemotherapy. METHODS: PET after both oral and intravenous administration of (18)F-FDG was performed on 2 healthy volunteers and 7 patients. An interval of 48 h was maintained between the oral administration and the intravenous administration. All scans were visually analyzed. Semiquantitative analysis of specific areas was done by calculating standardized uptake values (SUVs). Scanning was performed 60 min after intravenous tracer administration and 90 min after oral tracer administration. RESULTS: All lesions seen after intravenous administration were visualized on the oral study as well. SUVs were lower on the oral study than on the intravenous study. CONCLUSION: Oral (18)F-FDG can successfully be substituted for intravenous (18)F-FDG in patients with difficult intravenous access. However, because of the large amount of (18)F-FDG retained in the gut, careful interpretation will be required when disease of the gastrointestinal tract is being evaluated.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to see whether oral administration of (18)F-FDG could be substituted-without significant loss of information-for intravenous injection of (18)F-FDG in patients with difficult intravenous access of any cause, such as that often seen in cancerpatients after many cycles of chemotherapy. METHODS: PET after both oral and intravenous administration of (18)F-FDG was performed on 2 healthy volunteers and 7 patients. An interval of 48 h was maintained between the oral administration and the intravenous administration. All scans were visually analyzed. Semiquantitative analysis of specific areas was done by calculating standardized uptake values (SUVs). Scanning was performed 60 min after intravenous tracer administration and 90 min after oral tracer administration. RESULTS: All lesions seen after intravenous administration were visualized on the oral study as well. SUVs were lower on the oral study than on the intravenous study. CONCLUSION: Oral (18)F-FDG can successfully be substituted for intravenous (18)F-FDG in patients with difficult intravenous access. However, because of the large amount of (18)F-FDG retained in the gut, careful interpretation will be required when disease of the gastrointestinal tract is being evaluated.
Authors: Laura L Boles Ponto; Susan Walsh; Jiangeng Huang; Christine Mundt; Katherine Thede-Reynolds; G Leonard Watkins; John Sunderland; Michael Acevedo; Maureen Donovan Journal: AAPS J Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: Senthamizhchelvan Srinivasan; John P Crandall; Prateek Gajwani; George Sgouros; Esther Mena; Martin A Lodge; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-10-18 Impact factor: 11.082