4.3 Article

Thallium-201 versus Tc99m-glucoheptonate SPECT for evaluation of recurrent brain tumours: a within-subject comparison with pathological correlation

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 27-31

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2004.01.008

关键词

thallium; glucoheptonate; technetium; SPECT; fan beam collimator; recurrent brain tumour

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Thallium-201 (TI-201) is the most commonly used tracer for functional imaging of recurrent brain tumours. However, the physical properties of TI-201 are not particularly suitable for this application, thus, a technetium-99 (Tc99m) labelled alternative with more favourable physical properties has been sought. The aim of this study was to compare the ability of TI-201 and Tc99m-glucoheptonate single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to detect viable recurrent tumour and differentiate post-radiation gliosis. Method. Brain SPECT with TI-201 and Tc99m-glucoheptonate was performed in 20 patients with malignant brain tumour in whom recurrent disease was suspected. Tracer uptake in the mass was defined as high, moderate or low and was correlated with histological verification of the lesion in all cases. Results. Recurrent tumour was demonstrated in 17 patients by both TI-201 and Tc99m-glucoheptonate SPECT and confirmed by surgical resection in all 17 patients. Three patients had no tracer uptake on either TI-210 or Tc99m-glucoheptonate SPECT and surgical resection revealed only fibrotic tissue with areas of necrosis. Tc99m-glucoheptonate images were found to correlate more closely with the surgical findings with regard to the location of tumour margin, extent of tumour invasion and intratumoural necrosis, Conclusion. Tc99m-glucoheptonate brain SPECT is an accurate agent for SPECT imaging of recurrent brain tumours and may provide more information about the location of the tumour margin and its extent and intratumoural necrosis than TI-201. Tc99m-glucoheptonate may be a viable replacement for TI-201. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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