HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kaplan, W. D. Articles by Atkins, H. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kaplan, W. D. Articles by Atkins, H. L.

Clinical Comparison of Two Radiocolloids for Internal Mammary Lymphoscintigraphy

Divisions of Nuclear Medicine, Biostatistics, and Epidemiology, and Departments of Radiation Therapy and Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts

Correspondence: For reprints contact: William D. Kaplan, MD, Div. of Nuclear Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney St., Boston, MA 02115.

ABSTRACT

Recent studies suggest that ^99mTc-labeled radiocolloid (SC) compounded with hydrogen sulfide can be used to visualize lymph channels and nodes. Our study prospectively compared SC with ^99mTc antimony sulfide (SbS) colloid, in 28 patients undergoing internal mammary lymphoscintigraphy. Images were recorded on a scintillation camera and computer at 0.5, 1.0, and 3.0 hr. Quantitative analysis included assessment of percent (%) injected dose in nodes, the percent remaining at the injection site, and the relative intensity of the most cephalad node compared to a ⁵⁷Co standard. The mean () % injected dose of both radiocolloids within visualized nodes was less than 1% at each time interval, with no significant differences between 's. The % injected dose remaining at the injection site at 3.0 hr was 83 for SbS and 76 for SC not statistically significant (N.S.). The of the ratio of counts within the most cephalad node at 3.0 hr to counts within a ⁵⁷Co standard was 0.98 for SbS and 1.03 for SC (N.S.). Clinical assessment of number of nodes visualized and extent of radiocolloid migration showed no difference between the two agents. The biological and clinical parameters for the two colloids appear similar when used for internal mammary lymphoscintigraphy.