Verification Study of Residual Activity Measurements After Yttrium-90 Radioembolization with Glass Microspheres
Objective After yttrium-90 ( 90 Y) radioembolization, residual activity and its consequences for dosimetric calculations are often not reported. The manufacturer for glass microspheres prescribes standard residual activity measurements by a survey meter, but the validity lacks evidence. This study a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cardiovascular and interventional radiology 2020-09, Vol.43 (9), p.1378-1383 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
After yttrium-90 (
90
Y) radioembolization, residual activity and its consequences for dosimetric calculations are often not reported. The manufacturer for glass microspheres prescribes standard residual activity measurements by a survey meter, but the validity lacks evidence. This study aims to verify the accuracy of the survey meter approach for measuring residual activity of glass microspheres after treatment with glass microspheres.
Methods
To validate the accuracy of the survey meter approach, the measured residual activity of glass microspheres by survey meter was compared with measurements by PET. A sample of these waste containers was also measured by dose calibrator to confirm the accuracy of the PET.
Results
Twenty-four waste containers from glass microsphere treatments were prospectively scanned with
90
Y-PET/CT. Bland–Altman plots showed substantial disagreement in residual activity measured by survey meter versus the residual activity measured by PET and dose calibrator, whereas the correlation between PET and dose calibrator was excellent (
ρ
= 0.99).
Conclusion
This study found a significant disagreement between the residual activities measured by the survey meter, compared to measurements by PET and dose calibrator. If relatively high amounts of residual activity are encountered using the exposure rate measurement with a survey meter, additional quantification should be considered using either PET/CT or a dose calibrator measurement. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0174-1551 1432-086X |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00270-020-02504-7 |