JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

The Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 28 No. 9 1393-1400
© 1987 by Society of Nuclear Medicine
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fine, E. J.
Right arrow Articles by Blaufox, M. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fine, E. J.
Right arrow Articles by Blaufox, M. D.

Measurement of Effective Renal Plasma Flow: A Comparison of Methods

Eugene J. Fine, Michael Axelrod, Janet Gorkin, Khalid Saleemi and M. Donald Blaufox

Bronx Municipal Hospital Center, Montefiore Medical Center, and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York

Correspondence: For reprints contact: Eugene J. Fine, MD, Bronx Municipal Hospital Center, Pelham Parkway South & Eastchester Rd., Bronx, N.Y. 10461.

ABSTRACT

We have compared two in vitro methods and three variations of kidney background (BG) subtraction within a gamma camera method (41 examinations, 31 patients) for determination of effective renal plasma flow (ERPF) using 131I orthoiodohippurate (OIH). Method I: plasma samples at 20 and 45 min after OIH injection, ERPF = dose x slope/intercept; Method II: 45-min plasma sample, ERPF = –51.1 + 8.21x + 0.019x2, x = dose/45-min plasma activity/I. Individual kidney and total ERPF were determined from gamma camera (GC) methods using renal uptake 1–2 min after injection. All methods were compared against Method I (previously validated against paraaminohippurate (PAH) clearances). Method II, which requires one blood sample is more accurate than GC methods. GC methods are insensitive to operator variability in placement of renal and BG regions of interest. They may be useful to follow changes in relative or total ERPF, but accurate depth correction of renal data is suggested. In vitro, blood sample-based methods are more accurate.

FOOTNOTES

This paper is based is part on work presented at the 31st and 32nd Annual Meetings of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, June 5–8, 1985 and Houston, TX, June 25, 1985.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 1987 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.