Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi · 2025
[Impact of Differences in Radiopharmaceuticals on Brain Perfusion SPECT Phantom Examination Using the Hoffman 3D Brain Phantom].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Matsutomo Norikazu, Hayakawa Koya, Hisano Eiji, Konno Takaaki, Fukami Mitsuha, Yamamoto Tomoaki
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to clarify the effects of radiopharmaceuticals and buffer solutions on the accuracy of the Hoffman phantom examination.
METHODS: The Hoffman phantom was prepared using the water immersion method and was injected with 3 different solutions: 123I-MIBG, 123I-IMP only, and 123I-IMP plus buffer solution. Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) / computed tomography (CT) imaging was performed at 3-time points: immediately after encapsulation, after 10 min of stirring, and after 20 min of stirring. The relative SPECT counts and left-right ratios of the images obtained under each condition were evaluated.
RESULTS: The results revealed that the buffer solution facilitated the mixing of 123I-IMP, affecting the initial distribution of the radiopharmaceutical. However, after 20 min of stirring, no significant differences were observed in the relative SPECT counts and the left-right ratio of SPECT images among the different solutions, regardless of the radiopharmaceutical type or the presence of the buffer, in most regions.
CONCLUSION: Buffer solution promotes the mixing process; however, it was confirmed that sufficient agitation alone can produce comparable SPECT images, indicating that the use of a buffer may not be necessary if proper agitation is ensured during phantom preparation.
METHODS: The Hoffman phantom was prepared using the water immersion method and was injected with 3 different solutions: 123I-MIBG, 123I-IMP only, and 123I-IMP plus buffer solution. Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) / computed tomography (CT) imaging was performed at 3-time points: immediately after encapsulation, after 10 min of stirring, and after 20 min of stirring. The relative SPECT counts and left-right ratios of the images obtained under each condition were evaluated.
RESULTS: The results revealed that the buffer solution facilitated the mixing of 123I-IMP, affecting the initial distribution of the radiopharmaceutical. However, after 20 min of stirring, no significant differences were observed in the relative SPECT counts and the left-right ratio of SPECT images among the different solutions, regardless of the radiopharmaceutical type or the presence of the buffer, in most regions.
CONCLUSION: Buffer solution promotes the mixing process; however, it was confirmed that sufficient agitation alone can produce comparable SPECT images, indicating that the use of a buffer may not be necessary if proper agitation is ensured during phantom preparation.