Literature DB >> 24318158

SPECT/CT workflow and imaging protocols.

Catherine Beckers1, Roland Hustinx.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Introducing a hybrid imaging method such as single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT greatly alters the routine in the nuclear medicine department. It requires designing new workflow processes and the revision of original scheduling process and imaging protocols. In addition, the imaging protocol should be adapted for each individual patient, so that performing CT is fully justified and the CT procedure is fully tailored to address the clinical issue. Such refinements often occur before the procedure is started but may be required at some intermediate stage of the procedure. Furthermore, SPECT/CT leads in many instances to a new partnership with the radiology department. This article presents practical advice and highlights the key clinical elements which need to be considered to help understand the workflow process of SPECT/CT and optimise imaging protocols.
METHODS: The workflow process using SPECT/CT is complex in particular because of its bimodal character, the large spectrum of stakeholders, the multiplicity of their activities at various time points and the need for real-time decision-making.
RESULTS: With help from analytical tools developed for quality assessment, the workflow process using SPECT/CT may be separated into related, but independent steps, each with its specific human and material resources to use as inputs or outputs. This helps identify factors that could contribute to failure in routine clinical practice. At each step of the process, practical aspects to optimise imaging procedure and protocols are developed. A decision-making algorithm for justifying each CT indication as well as the appropriateness of each CT protocol is the cornerstone of routine clinical practice using SPECT/CT.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, implementing hybrid SPECT/CT imaging requires new ways of working. It is highly rewarding from a clinical perspective, but it also proves to be a daily challenge in terms of management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24318158     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-013-2629-y

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


  15 in total

1.  Variations of clinical SPECT/CT operations: an international survey.

Authors:  H Wieder; L S Freudenberg; J Czernin; B N Navar; O Israel; T Beyer
Journal:  Nuklearmedizin       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 1.379

2.  Quality initiatives: planning, setting up, and carrying out radiology process improvement projects.

Authors:  Eric P Tamm; Janio Szklaruk; Leejo Puthooran; Danna Stone; Brian L Stevens; Cathy Modaro
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 5.333

3.  SPECT/CT.

Authors:  Andreas K Buck; Stephan Nekolla; Sibylle Ziegler; Ambros Beer; Bernd J Krause; Ken Herrmann; Klemens Scheidhauer; Hans-Juergen Wester; Ernst J Rummeny; Markus Schwaiger; Alexander Drzezga
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Radiation exposure from musculoskeletal computerized tomographic scans.

Authors:  Debdut Biswas; Jesse E Bible; Michael Bohan; Andrew K Simpson; Peter G Whang; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 5.  Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog.

Authors:  Fred A Mettler; Walter Huda; Terry T Yoshizumi; Mahadevappa Mahesh
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 6.  Advantages and limitations of imaging the musculoskeletal system by conventional radiological, radionuclide, and hybrid modalities.

Authors:  Sanjay Vijayanathan; Sajid Butt; Gopinath Gnanasegaran; Ashley M Groves
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.446

Review 7.  Multislice SPECT/CT in benign and malignant bone disease: when the ordinary turns into the extraordinary.

Authors:  Gopinath Gnanasegaran; Tara Barwick; Kathryn Adamson; Hosahalli Mohan; David Sharp; Ignac Fogelman
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.446

8.  Routine quality control recommendations for nuclear medicine instrumentation.

Authors:  Ellinor Busemann Sokole; Anna Płachcínska; Alan Britten; Maria Lyra Georgosopoulou; Wendy Tindale; Rigobert Klett
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Comparison of SPECT/CT, SPECT, and planar imaging with single- and dual-phase (99m)Tc-sestamibi parathyroid scintigraphy.

Authors:  William C Lavely; Sibyll Goetze; Kent P Friedman; Jeffrey P Leal; Zhe Zhang; Elizabeth Garret-Mayer; Alan P Dackiw; Ralph P Tufano; Martha A Zeiger; Harvey A Ziessman
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Whole-body SPECT/CT for bone scintigraphy: diagnostic value and effect on patient management in oncological patients.

Authors:  H Palmedo; C Marx; A Ebert; B Kreft; Y Ko; A Türler; R Vorreuther; U Göhring; H H Schild; T Gerhardt; U Pöge; S Ezziddin; H-J Biersack; H Ahmadzadehfar
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-08-24       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.