Comparative evaluation of four different99mTc-sulfur colloid kits used for liver scanning
- 32 Downloads
The distribution of four different commercially available A, B, C, D kits (99mTc-sulfur colloid) for hepatoimaging was compared in mice by organ radioassay and in rabbits for blood clearance. The distribution of kits A and C (single step kits) was assessed in the human by blood clearance, external liver, spleen measurement, and scintillation camera imaging. Kit A reaches a high concentration in liver within 15–20 minutes with relatively high surrounding tissue background, and superior spleen scintiphotos. However, when kit C was used, a high activity concentration in the liver was reached within 10–15 minutes with low tissue background and faint visualization of the radiotracer in the spleen. Blood clearance of the four99mTc-sulfur colloids was determined in rabbits. The data obtained indicated that the four hepatoagents exhibit rapid blood clearance but the initial decrease of blood activity curve of kit D was relatively faster than the other three hepatic agents. The biodistribution is similar for the four99mTc-S-colloids but the blood retained higher activity residue using kit A compared with others. The formation of99mTc-sulfur colloid using kits B, D (multistep kits) involves many steps after the addition of99mTcO 4 − to the reagent. These procedures are time consuming, required facilities at the medical institutions and give rise to the radiation exposure. While single step kits A and C have the same diagnostic value, the use of kit C allows a reduction of absorbed radiation, which may be useful in the liver exploration in children.
KeywordsActivity Concentration Activity Curve Camera Imaging Initial Decrease Blood Clearance
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.G. SUBRAMANIAN, J. G. MCAFFEE, A. MEHTER, R. J. BLAIR, F. D. THOMAS, J. Nucl. Med., 14 (1973) 459.Google Scholar
- 2.E. LACHNIK, W. ZNICZYK, J. WIZA, I. LICINSKA, W. JAKUBOWSKI, W. CRAHAN, Proc. Symp. Heidelberg 1980, Vol. 1, IAEA, Vienna, 1981.Google Scholar
- 3.H. VETTER, R. FALKNER, A. NEUMEYER, J. Clin. Invert., 33 (1953) 1544.Google Scholar
- 5.H. STERN, D. A. GOODWIN, N. SCHEFFEL, H. N. WAGNER, H. H. KRAMER, Nucleonics 24 (1966) 57.Google Scholar
- 6.D. A. GOODWIN, H. S. STERN, H. N. WAGNER, H. KRAMER, Nucleonics, 24 (1966) 65.Google Scholar
- 7.P. V. HERPER, K. A. LETHROP, P. RICHARDS, J. Nucl. Med., 5 (1964) 382.Google Scholar
- 9.P. B. R. PERSSON, S. E. STRAND, T. KNOOS, J. Radioanal. Chem. 43 (1975) 275.Google Scholar
- 10.R. MUNZE, 4th Int. Symp. Radiopharm. Chem. Abst., Julich, 2982, p. 182.Google Scholar
- 11.J. STEIGMAN, N. A. SOLOMON, L. L. Y. HWANG, J. Appl. Radiation Isotopes, 3 (1986) 323.Google Scholar
- 13.V. KEMPI, R. B. R. PERSSON, Nucl. Med. (Stuttgart) 13 (1974–75) 389.Google Scholar
- 14.E. W. LACHNIK, K. ZULCZYK, J. WIZA, I. LICINSKA, W. JAKUBOWSKI, W. GRABAN, Proc. IAEA Symp., Heidelberg, Vol. 1, Vienna, 1981, p. 551.Google Scholar