Kate I Rewers1, Svend Hvidsten2, Oke Gerke2,3, Søren Schifter2. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000, Odense, Denmark. kate.rewers@rsyd.dk. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000, Odense, Denmark. 3. Centre of Health Economics Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to define reference ranges for quantitative parameters in [(99m)Tc]mercaptoacetyltriglycerine ([(99m)Tc]MAG3) renography to assist interpretation in a semi-automated (Xeleris, GE) compared to a manual (Picker, Odyssey) software package. PROCEDURES: Forty-eight subjects approved for renal donation were evaluated with [(99m)Tc]MAG3 renography using both the Xeleris and the Picker software. RESULTS: Reference ranges for the two software were comparable regarding the relative function of the two kidneys (the split function, SF) and the residual activities (RA). The time to peak whole-kidney activities (T max whole-kidney) was more dependent on the type of software. Using Bland-Altman limits, we found good and acceptable agreement between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: We found good correlation between renography results using the Xeleris and Picker software packages. However, software-specific reference ranges are needed.
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to define reference ranges for quantitative parameters in [(99m)Tc]mercaptoacetyltriglycerine ([(99m)Tc]MAG3) renography to assist interpretation in a semi-automated (Xeleris, GE) compared to a manual (Picker, Odyssey) software package. PROCEDURES: Forty-eight subjects approved for renal donation were evaluated with [(99m)Tc]MAG3 renography using both the Xeleris and the Picker software. RESULTS: Reference ranges for the two software were comparable regarding the relative function of the two kidneys (the split function, SF) and the residual activities (RA). The time to peak whole-kidney activities (T max whole-kidney) was more dependent on the type of software. Using Bland-Altman limits, we found good and acceptable agreement between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: We found good correlation between renography results using the Xeleris and Picker software packages. However, software-specific reference ranges are needed.
Authors: Y Inoue; K Yoshikawa; N Yoshioka; T Watanabe; S Saegusa; Y Kaneko; I Yokoyama; K Ohtomo Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Fabio P Esteves; Andrew Taylor; Amita Manatunga; Russell D Folks; Meghna Krishnan; Ernest V Garcia Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.959