BACKGROUND: There is a concern regarding the use of iodinated contrast agents (ICA) for chest and neck computed tomography (CT) to localize metastatases in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). This is because the iodine in ICA can compete with (131)I and interfere with subsequent whole scans or radioactive iodine treatment. The required period for patients to eliminate the excess iodine is not clear. Therefore, knowing the period for iodine levels to return to baseline after the injection of ICA would permit a more reliable indication of CT for DTC patients. The most widely used marker to assess the plasmatic iodine pool is the urinary iodine (UI) concentration, which can be collected over a period of 24 hours (24U) or as a single-spot urinary sample (sU). As 24U collections are more difficult to perform, sU samples are preferable. It has not been established, however, if the measurement of iodine in sU is accurate for situations of excess iodine. METHODS: We evaluated 25 patients with DTC who received ICA to perform chest or neck CT. They collected 24U and sU urinary samples before the CT scan and 1 week and 1, 2, and 3 months after the test. UI was quantified by a semiautomated colorimetric method. RESULTS: Baseline median UI levels were 21.8 μg/dL for 24U and 26 μg/dL for sU. One week after ICA, UI median levels were very high for all patients, 800 μg/dL. One month after ICA, however, UI median levels returned to baseline in all patients, 19.0 μg/dL for 24U and 20 μg/dL for sU. Although the values of median UI obtained from sU and 24U samples were signicantly different, we observed a significant correlation between samples collected in 24U and sU in all evaluated periods. CONCLUSION: One month is required for UI to return to its baseline value after the use of ICA and for patients (after total thyroidectomy and radioiodine therapy) to eliminate the excess of iodine. In addition, sU samples, although not statistically similar to 24U values, can be used as a good marker to evaluate patients suspected of contamination with iodine.
BACKGROUND: There is a concern regarding the use of iodinated contrast agents (ICA) for chest and neck computed tomography (CT) to localize metastatases in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). This is because the iodine in ICA can compete with (131)I and interfere with subsequent whole scans or radioactive iodine treatment. The required period for patients to eliminate the excess iodine is not clear. Therefore, knowing the period for iodine levels to return to baseline after the injection of ICA would permit a more reliable indication of CT for DTCpatients. The most widely used marker to assess the plasmatic iodine pool is the urinary iodine (UI) concentration, which can be collected over a period of 24 hours (24U) or as a single-spot urinary sample (sU). As 24U collections are more difficult to perform, sU samples are preferable. It has not been established, however, if the measurement of iodine in sU is accurate for situations of excess iodine. METHODS: We evaluated 25 patients with DTC who received ICA to perform chest or neck CT. They collected 24U and sU urinary samples before the CT scan and 1 week and 1, 2, and 3 months after the test. UI was quantified by a semiautomated colorimetric method. RESULTS: Baseline median UI levels were 21.8 μg/dL for 24U and 26 μg/dL for sU. One week after ICA, UI median levels were very high for all patients, 800 μg/dL. One month after ICA, however, UI median levels returned to baseline in all patients, 19.0 μg/dL for 24U and 20 μg/dL for sU. Although the values of median UI obtained from sU and 24U samples were signicantly different, we observed a significant correlation between samples collected in 24U and sU in all evaluated periods. CONCLUSION: One month is required for UI to return to its baseline value after the use of ICA and for patients (after total thyroidectomy and radioiodine therapy) to eliminate the excess of iodine. In addition, sU samples, although not statistically similar to 24U values, can be used as a good marker to evaluate patients suspected of contamination with iodine.
Authors: Eduardo A Pretell; Francois Delange; Ulrike Hostalek; Sandro Corigliano; Luis Barreda; Ana María Higa; Noe Altschuler; Derek Barragán; José L Cevallos; Ofelia Gonzales; Jorge A Jara; Geraldo Medeiros-Neto; José A Montes; Santiago Muzzo; Víctor M Pacheco; Luis Cordero Journal: Thyroid Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Pernille Vejbjerg; Nils Knudsen; Hans Perrild; Peter Laurberg; Stig Andersen; Lone B Rasmussen; Lars Ovesen; Torben Jørgensen Journal: Thyroid Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Il Seong Nam-Goong; Ha Young Kim; Gyungyub Gong; Ho Kyu Lee; Suck Joon Hong; Won Bae Kim; Young Kee Shong Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Rosália P Padovani; Rui M B Maciel; Teresa S Kasamatsu; Beatriz C G Freitas; Marilia M S Marone; Cleber P Camacho; Rosa Paula M Biscolla Journal: Eur Thyroid J Date: 2015-06-11
Authors: Se Jin Cho; Chong Hyun Suh; Jung Hwan Baek; Sae Rom Chung; Young Jun Choi; Jeong Hyun Lee Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Çağın Mustafa Üreyen; Kahraman Coşansu; Mustafa Gökhan Vural; Sait Emir Şahin; Mehmet Akif Çakar; Harun Kılıç; Mustafa Tarık Ağaç; Hüseyin Gündüz; Ramazan Akdemir; Ersan Tatlı Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2019-09-20 Impact factor: 1.927
Authors: Sun Y Lee; Donny L F Chang; Xuemei He; Elizabeth N Pearce; Lewis E Braverman; Angela M Leung Journal: Thyroid Date: 2015-03-23 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Bryan R Haugen; Erik K Alexander; Keith C Bible; Gerard M Doherty; Susan J Mandel; Yuri E Nikiforov; Furio Pacini; Gregory W Randolph; Anna M Sawka; Martin Schlumberger; Kathryn G Schuff; Steven I Sherman; Julie Ann Sosa; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle; Leonard Wartofsky Journal: Thyroid Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.568