Literature DB >> 22740098

Validation of a new protocol for ¹⁸F-FDG infusion using an automatic combined dispenser and injector system.

Michela Lecchi1, Giovanni Lucignani, Claudio Maioli, Giuseppe Ignelzi, Angelo Del Sole.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In nuclear medicine, radiopharmaceuticals are usually administered in unit doses partitioned from multi-dose vials. The partitioning typically takes place in a radiopharmacy, depending on local practice. Automatic, as opposed to manual, partitioning and administration should reduce radiation exposure of the personnel involved, improve the accuracy of the administration and mitigate contamination. This study set out to verify and validate the (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) administration procedure performed using Intego (MEDRAD, Inc., Warrendale, PA, USA), a combined dispenser and injector system. We considered maintenance of sterility and the system's potential to improve, with respect to the manual procedure, the accuracy of net administered (18)F-FDG radioactivity in patients and the radiation protection of operators.
METHODS: A media-fill procedure was used to assess whether sterility is maintained during use of the Intego system. Simulating a typical working day's setup and use of the system, we investigated the accuracy of the net administered (18)F-FDG activity obtained with Intego versus the manual dose delivery system. We also measured personnel radiation exposure during use of Intego and during manual administration and recorded and compared environmental doses in the two conditions.
RESULTS: The radiopharmaceutical remained sterile in all the tests performed. The accuracy of the net (18)F-FDG activity delivered to the patients was found to be within 3 % points, as required by European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) guidelines on (18)F-FDG imaging procedures. With Intego, the residual radioactivity in the tubing was 0.20 MBq, corresponding to approximately 0.07 % of the mean activity delivered. With manual injection, the residual radioactivity in the syringe averaged 7.37 MBq, corresponding to a mean error of 2.9 % in the delivered dose. During the injection step of the positron emission tomography (PET) procedure, whole-body and extremity radiation exposures were significantly reduced with Intego by 38 and by 94 %, respectively, compared to the levels associated with manual administration (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Integoaccurately partitions and administers sterile doses of (18)F-FDG from multi-dose vials. Compared with standard manual (18)F-FDG administration, the new procedure with an automatic dispensing and injection system greatly reduces the extremity dose to the operator involved in the administration of the radiopharmaceutical.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22740098     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2174-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  11 in total

1.  Testing of microbial contamination during the preparation of the radiocompound [⁹⁰Y]DOTATOC for clinical trials: a process validation study by Media Fill approach.

Authors:  V Sirna; L Garaboldi; S Papi; L Martano; E Omodeo Salè; G Paganelli; M Chinol
Journal:  Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.346

2.  The introduction of automated dispensing and injection during PET procedures: a step in the optimisation of extremity doses and whole-body doses of nuclear medicine staff.

Authors:  P Covens; D Berus; F Vanhavere; V Caveliers
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  Radiation dose to PET technologists and strategies to lower occupational exposure.

Authors:  Fiona O Roberts; Dishan H Gunawardana; Kunthi Pathmaraj; Anthony Wallace; Paul L U; Tian Mi; Sam U Berlangieri; Graeme J O'Keefe; Chris C Rowe; Andrew M Scott
Journal:  J Nucl Med Technol       Date:  2005-03

4.  Measurements of occupational exposure for a technologist performing 18F FDG PET scans.

Authors:  Talma Biran; Jolie Weininger; Shalom Malchi; Rami Marciano; Roland Chisin
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.316

5.  Extremity dosimetry for radiation workers handling unsealed radionuclides in nuclear medicine departments in India.

Authors:  Pankaj Tandon; Meera Venkatesh; B C Bhatt
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.316

6.  Radiation dose rates from patients undergoing PET: implications for technologists and waiting areas.

Authors:  N A Benatar; B F Cronin; M J O'Doherty
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  2000-05

7.  Technologist radiation exposure in routine clinical practice with 18F-FDG PET.

Authors:  Benjamin Guillet; Pierre Quentin; Serge Waultier; Marc Bourrelly; Pascale Pisano; Olivier Mundler
Journal:  J Nucl Med Technol       Date:  2005-09

8.  Doses to nuclear technicians in a dedicated PET/CT centre utilising 18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG).

Authors:  T Seierstad; E Stranden; K Bjering; M Evensen; A Holt; H M Michalsen; O Wetteland
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2006-09-20       Impact factor: 0.972

9.  Operational radiation safety for PET-CT, SPECT-CT, and cyclotron facilities.

Authors:  Pat Zanzonico; Lawrence Dauer; Jean St Germain
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.316

10.  FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0.

Authors:  Ronald Boellaard; Mike J O'Doherty; Wolfgang A Weber; Felix M Mottaghy; Markus N Lonsdale; Sigrid G Stroobants; Wim J G Oyen; Joerg Kotzerke; Otto S Hoekstra; Jan Pruim; Paul K Marsden; Klaus Tatsch; Corneline J Hoekstra; Eric P Visser; Bertjan Arends; Fred J Verzijlbergen; Josee M Zijlstra; Emile F I Comans; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Anne M Paans; Antoon T Willemsen; Thomas Beyer; Andreas Bockisch; Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop; Dominique Delbeke; Richard P Baum; Arturo Chiti; Bernd J Krause
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 9.236

View more
  5 in total

1.  Effective and equivalent dose minimization for personnel in PET procedures: how far are we from the goal?

Authors:  M Lecchi; S Malaspina; A Del Sole
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  An account of data entry inconsistencies and their impact on positron emission tomography quantification.

Authors:  Tram Nguyen; Christina Baun; Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.817

3.  Clinical validation of a population-based input function for 20-min dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG multiparametric PET imaging.

Authors:  André H Dias; Anne M Smith; Vijay Shah; David Pigg; Lars C Gormsen; Ole L Munk
Journal:  EJNMMI Phys       Date:  2022-09-08

4.  ARAS: an automated radioactivity aliquoting system for dispensing solutions containing positron-emitting radioisotopes.

Authors:  Alex A Dooraghi; Lewis Carroll; Jeffrey Collins; R Michael van Dam; Arion F Chatziioannou
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 3.138

5.  Have you looked for "stranger things" in your automated PET dose dispensing system? A process and operators qualification scheme.

Authors:  Tristan Martin; Anaïs Moyon; Cyril Fersing; Evan Terrier; Aude Gouillet; Fabienne Giraud; Benjamin Guillet; Philippe Garrigue
Journal:  EJNMMI Radiopharm Chem       Date:  2019-06-13
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.