4.4 Article

Investigation of a novel variable dosing protocol for radioiodine treatment of feline hyperthyroidism

期刊

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 32, 期 6, 页码 1856-1863

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15296

关键词

feline; hyperthyroid; radioiodine; scintigraphy

资金

  1. Virginia-Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine Veterinary Memorial Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Objective Radioiodine is the treatment of choice for hyperthyroidism in cats. The ideal method of dose determination of radioiodine remains controversial. To compare a method of radioiodine dose determination that utilized thyroid scintigraphy with a standard fixed dose for treatment of hyperthyroidism. Animals Methods Fifty-seven and 23 client-owned hyperthyroid cats in the variable and fixed dose groups, respectively. Cats with a percent dose uptake using Tc-99m-pertechnetate uptake on thyroid scintigraphy <5%, 5%-10%, and >10% were to receive 3, 3.5, or 4.5 millicuries (mCi) of radioiodine, respectively, administered SC. Radioiodine dose was adjusted according to thyroid gland size as determined by the thyroid:salivary size ratio and categorized as <5:1, 5-10:1, and >10:1. If the thyroid size fell into a higher dosing category than the percent dose uptake, the dose was increased accordingly. Cats in the fixed dose group received 4.5 mCi. Six months after treatment, cats were determined to be euthyroid, hypothyroid, or hyperthyroid based on serum thyroxine and thyroid stimulating hormone concentrations. Results Conclusions No difference in outcome was found between the variable and fixed dose treatment groups. Euthyroidism, hypothyroidism, and persistent hyperthyroidism developed in 61, 30, and 9% of cats in the fixed dose group compared to 58, 26, and 16%, respectively, in the variable dose group. A variable dosing method of radioiodine based on percent dose uptake primarily and thyroid gland size secondarily did not improve outcome compared to a standard fixed dose method.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据