It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Validation of the 99mTc-DMSA planar scintigraphy accuracy for split renal function assessment and comparison with evaluation based on SPECT imaging both with and without CT attenuation correction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: For split renal function assessment two methods were used: A) planar scintigraphy based on anterior and posterior projections using correction for kidney depth calculated by the geometric mean; B) semi-quantitative evaluation based on SPECT (B1) and attenuation-corrected SPECT/CT (B2) images using locally developed software for kidney segmentation and voxel-based analysis. All three methods were performed with a phantom simulating body including pair of kidneys. For patient study methods A and B1 were applied on a group of 140 children and adolescents with various renal diseases. Renal function ratios were compared both mutually and with physically measured activity ratios in the phantom.
RESULTS: Method A provided results which were closest to measured reference values (average absolute difference of 0.9 percentage points [pp]). Method B1 was noticeably worse (2.1pp), whereas attenuation correction (B2) improved tomography results considerably (1.3 pp). The superiority of planar imaging could be caused among others by differences in creation of planar range of interest compared to tomographic volume of interest. However all the differences were under the threshold of any clinical importance. The comparison between method A and B1 based on patient study also showed differences mostly of none clinical importance.
CONCLUSION: Routine evaluation of split renal function using planar technique with correction of the kidney depth is at least equivalent to tomographic evaluation, and there is no need to update the established clinical practice.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, General University Hospital and First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague,. [email protected]
2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, General University Hospital and First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague,
3 Department of Paediatrics, Hospital Na Bulovce, Prague
4 Clinic of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, General University Hospital and First. Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague,