使用蒙特卡洛和 MIRD 方法计算注射 99m锝-HMPAO、99m锝-DMSA 和 99m锝-硫胶体患者的吸收剂量

IF 1.5 3区 化学 Q3 CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1007/s10967-024-09732-y
Farzane Mohajeri, Ahad Ollah Ezzati
{"title":"使用蒙特卡洛和 MIRD 方法计算注射 99m锝-HMPAO、99m锝-DMSA 和 99m锝-硫胶体患者的吸收剂量","authors":"Farzane Mohajeri, Ahad Ollah Ezzati","doi":"10.1007/s10967-024-09732-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study compares the accuracy of dosimetry calculations using the Monte Carlo (MC) method and the MIRD method for <sup>99m</sup>Tc-HMPAO, <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DMSA, and <sup>99m</sup>Tc-sulfur colloid administered to an adult female patient undergoing SPECT imaging. Comparing the two methods, the dose estimation differences between MC and MIRD methods were found to be 11.57%, 1.70%, and 30.04% for <sup>99m</sup>Tc-HMPAO, <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DMSA, and <sup>99m</sup>Tc-sulfur colloid, respectively. In conclusion, this study emphasizes the importance of accurate dosimetry in nuclear medicine. The MC method perform better than the MIRD method in predicting absorbed doses, making it a valuable tool for optimizing radiation therapies and improving patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Calculation of the absorbed dose to 99mTc-HMPAO, 99mTc-DMSA, and 99mTc-sulfur colloid injected patients by using Monte Carlo and MIRD methods\",\"authors\":\"Farzane Mohajeri, Ahad Ollah Ezzati\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10967-024-09732-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study compares the accuracy of dosimetry calculations using the Monte Carlo (MC) method and the MIRD method for <sup>99m</sup>Tc-HMPAO, <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DMSA, and <sup>99m</sup>Tc-sulfur colloid administered to an adult female patient undergoing SPECT imaging. Comparing the two methods, the dose estimation differences between MC and MIRD methods were found to be 11.57%, 1.70%, and 30.04% for <sup>99m</sup>Tc-HMPAO, <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DMSA, and <sup>99m</sup>Tc-sulfur colloid, respectively. In conclusion, this study emphasizes the importance of accurate dosimetry in nuclear medicine. The MC method perform better than the MIRD method in predicting absorbed doses, making it a valuable tool for optimizing radiation therapies and improving patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":661,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-024-09732-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-024-09732-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究比较了使用蒙特卡洛(Monte Carlo,MC)法和 MIRD 法对接受 SPECT 成像的成年女性患者施用 99m锝-HMPAO、99m锝-DMSA 和 99m锝 硫胶体进行剂量测定计算的准确性。比较两种方法,发现 MC 和 MIRD 方法对 99m锝-HMPAO、99m锝-DMSA 和 99m锝- 硫胶体的剂量估计差异分别为 11.57%、1.70% 和 30.04%。总之,这项研究强调了准确剂量测定在核医学中的重要性。MC 方法在预测吸收剂量方面优于 MIRD 方法,是优化放射治疗和改善患者预后的重要工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Calculation of the absorbed dose to 99mTc-HMPAO, 99mTc-DMSA, and 99mTc-sulfur colloid injected patients by using Monte Carlo and MIRD methods

This study compares the accuracy of dosimetry calculations using the Monte Carlo (MC) method and the MIRD method for 99mTc-HMPAO, 99mTc-DMSA, and 99mTc-sulfur colloid administered to an adult female patient undergoing SPECT imaging. Comparing the two methods, the dose estimation differences between MC and MIRD methods were found to be 11.57%, 1.70%, and 30.04% for 99mTc-HMPAO, 99mTc-DMSA, and 99mTc-sulfur colloid, respectively. In conclusion, this study emphasizes the importance of accurate dosimetry in nuclear medicine. The MC method perform better than the MIRD method in predicting absorbed doses, making it a valuable tool for optimizing radiation therapies and improving patient outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
504
审稿时长
2.2 months
期刊介绍: An international periodical publishing original papers, letters, review papers and short communications on nuclear chemistry. The subjects covered include: Nuclear chemistry, Radiochemistry, Radiation chemistry, Radiobiological chemistry, Environmental radiochemistry, Production and control of radioisotopes and labelled compounds, Nuclear power plant chemistry, Nuclear fuel chemistry, Radioanalytical chemistry, Radiation detection and measurement, Nuclear instrumentation and automation, etc.
期刊最新文献
Uranium isotopes and several heavy elements in selected waters in Quang Nam-Da Nang provinces, Central Vietnam Instrumental neutron activation analysis of Ghanaian hot pepper (Capsicum spp. l.) collections 89Zr PET imaging guided validation of the medicinal potentiality of UiO-66 based nano drug delivery system Correlation and statistical analysis between natural radioactivity and hazards in rocks from Kolar taluk, Karnataka Feasibility of laser induced breakdown spectroscopy for quantification of zirconium in nuclear streams
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1