The estimation of body organs absorbed dose induced by 99mTc –MDP radiopharmaceutical in the patients undergoing bone scan by specific dosimetry and planar/SPECT hybrid method

taghizade, sedighe; parach, aliasghar; Razavi-Ratki, kazem; bagheri, mahmoud

Volume 26, Issue 6 (Sep 2018) JSSU 2018, 26(6): 463-472 | Back to browse issues page

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

taghizade S, parach A, Razavi-Ratki K, bagheri M. The estimation of body organs absorbed dose induced by 99mTc –MDP radiopharmaceutical in the patients undergoing bone scan by specific dosimetry and planar/SPECT hybrid method. JSSU 2018; 26 (6) :463-472
URL: http://jssu.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-4317-en.html

The estimation of body organs absorbed dose induced by 99mTc –MDP radiopharmaceutical in the patients undergoing bone scan by specific dosimetry and planar/SPECT hybrid method

Sedighe Taghizade

, Aliasghar Parach ^*

, Kazem Razavi-Ratki

, Mahmoud Bagheri

Abstract: (4492 Views)

Introduction: Bone scan is a nuclear medicine scan test, which leads to finding specific abnormalities in the bone. Methylene Diphosphonate (MDP) is used to bone scan. This combination is absorbed by bone tissue and is excreted by the kidneys and bladder. The purpose of this study was to estimate the absorbed dose of organs in bone scan with injection MDP radiopharmaceutical using Mirdose software and the SPECT/planar hybrid method.
Methods: 20 females who referred to the Nuclear Medicine Department for bone disorders were examined and three planar images intervals of 1, 3 and 5 hours and one SPECT at 3 hours after injection were taken from them. The cumulative activity of the organs was obtained using the SPECT/planar hybrid method and then the absorbed dose was calculated using Mirdose software.
Results: The mean absorbed dose due to ^99mTc-MDP in women for heart wall (0.0026±0.0005), kidneys (0.043± 0.0072), liver (0.0034±0.0001), lungs (0.0024±0.0001), muscle (0.0028±0.0006), ovaries (0.0056±0.0004), spleen (0.0048±0.0003), urinary bladder wall (0.0680±0.0120), bones (0.0046± 0.0006) and reminder of the body (0.0031± 0.00098) mGy/MBq were obtained.
Conclusion: Bladder, kidneys, ovaries, spleen, bones, liver, muscles, walls of the heart and lungs have the highest rates of absorbed dose in organs, respectively.Since the women studied in this study had different diseases and bone disorders and biological characteristics, and some of them were metastatic due to the disease, this led to a different absorption of radiopharmaceuticals in the various organs of these patients, which caused the difference is in the average absorbed dose of radiopharmaceuticals in their organs.

Keywords: Internal absorbed dose, Combined SPECT/Planar method, Mirdose software, Cumulated activity.

Full-Text [PDF 1245 kb] (1692 Downloads)

Type of Study: Original article | Subject: Medical Physics
Received: 2017/09/6 | Accepted: 2018/05/12 | Published: 2018/10/21

References

1. 1- Arora S, Dhull VS, Karunanithi S, Parida GK, Sharma A, Shamim S. 99m Tc-MDP SPECT/CT as the one-stop imaging modality for the diagnosis of early setting of Kienbock's disease. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2015; 34(3): 185-7.

2. 2- Zhao Z, Li L, Li F, Zhao L. Single photon emission computed tomography/spiral computed tomography fusion imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastasis in patients with known cancer. Skeletal Radiol 2010; 39(2): 147-53.

3. 3- Krol A. Nuclear Medicine Physics: The Basics. 5th ed.Radiology; 1992;208(1):142.

4. 4- Brown ML, Collier BD Jr, Fogelman I. Bone scintigraphy: part 1. oncology and infection. J Nucl Med 1993; 34(12): 2236-40.

5. 5- Min JW, Um SW, Yim JJ, Yoo CG, Han SK, Shim YS, Kim YW. The role of whole-body FDG PET/CT, Tc 99m MDP bone scintigraphy, and serum alkaline phosphatase in detecting bone metastasis in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Korean Med Sci 2009; 24(2): 275-80.

6. 6- Şahin E, Elboğa U, Kalender E. An Incidental Finding of Extraosseous Uptake in Technetium 99m Methylene Diphosphonate Bone Scintigraphy: Uterine Leiomyoma. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2014; 45(2): 141-3.

7. 7- Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM, Xu Y, Deng SM. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing 18FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol 2011; 21(12): 2604-17.

8. 8- Helal N. Patient organs dose calculations in nuclear medicine. Int J Res Rev Appl Sci 2012; 11(1): 153-61.

9. 9- Davis MA, Jones AG. Comparison of 99mTc-labeled phosphate and phosphonate agents for skeletal imaging. Semin Nucl Med 1976: 6(1): 19-31.

10. 10- Khan AH, Yusof CN, Ahmad A, Sulaiman SA. Bone Syntigraphy with^ sup 99m^ Tc-MDP in Breast Cancer Patient. Int J Pharm Sci Res 2012; 4(12): 2015-17.

11. 11- Schaefer C, Meister R, Wentzeck R, Weber-Schoendorfer C. Fetal outcome after technetium scintigraphy in early pregnancy. Reprod Toxicol 2009; 28(2): 161-6.

12. 12- Stabin MG. Uncertainties in internal dose calculations for radiopharmaceuticals. J Nucl Med 2008; 49(5): 853-60.

13. 13- Amato E, Campennì A, Herberg A, Minutoli F, Baldari S. Internal Radiation Dosimetry: Models and Applications. 12 Chapters on Nuclear Medicine: InTech;2011.

14. 14- Stabin MG. MIRDOSE: personal computer software for internal dose assessment in nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med 1996; 37(3): 538-46.

15. 15- Fisher DR, Shen S, Meredith RF. MIRD dose estimate report No. 20: radiation absorbed-dose estimates for 111In-and 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(4): 644-52.

16. 16- Siegel JA, Thomas SR, Stubbs JB, Stabin MG. MIRD pamphlet no. 16: techniques for quantitative radiopharmaceutical biodistribution data acquisition and analysis for use in human radiation dose estimates. J Nucl Med 1999; 40(2): 37S-61S.

19. 17- Zanzonico P. Nuclear Medicine Radiation Dosimetry, Advanced Theoretical Principles.: Medical physics.2011; 38(1):549.

20. 18- Bambara LT, Kyere AK, Hasford F, Sosu EK, Wilson IK. Estimation of kidney and bladder radionuclide activity for patients undergoing bone scan. J Radiat Res Appl Sci 2015; 8(3): 317-22.

24. 19- Marcatili S, Villoing D, Mauxion T, McParland B, Bardiès M. Model-based versus specific dosimetry in diagnostic context: Comparison of three dosimetric approaches. Med Phy 2015; 42(3): 1288-96.

26.