TY - JOUR T1 - Variation in Delivery Methods of 18F-FDG for Patients: A Single Institution Observation. JF - Journal of Nuclear Medicine JO - J Nucl Med SP - 3015 LP - 3015 VL - 62 IS - supplement 1 AU - Sulaiman Alraish AU - Zainab ALQallaf AU - Abdullah Alali AU - Abdulredha Esmail Y1 - 2021/05/01 UR - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/62/supplement_1/3015.abstract N2 - 3015Introduction: The most used tracer for the PET/CT procedure is 18F-FDG (fluoro-deoxy-glucose). The method of delivering the dose to patients is commonly through manual injection method. However, recent availability of automated injector systems made the possibility to deliver tailored prescribed doses according to patient’s body weight. Commercially available systems includes but not limited to: IRIS ® (Comecer), MEDRAD® Intego (Bayer), Posijet® (Lemer Pax) and Karl100® (Tema Sinergie). Automated PET injector systems are preferred method of injecting PET isotopes due to their accuracy in delivering prescribed doses and their effect in reducing radiation doe to staff. These systems require the use of daily disposable administration kits used for both; the machine and patients. In the event of supply interruption, manual injection methods is the only way to deliver activity to patients for the required exam. Objectives: The aim of this study is to illustrate the difference in amount of administered doses of 18F-FDG to patient for PET/CT studies by the two methods (automatic and manual injection technique). Materials and Methods: The data of patients who have received 18F-FDG by automatic technique were compared to a group of patients who received the dose through manual injection method. The prescribed doses according to patient weight (as per department protocol) were compared between periods (9 December 2018 to 28 January 2019) and (of 14 October 2020 to 20 December 2020). Deviation percentage from the agreed departmental formula were investigated (0.06mCi per kg). 107 patients were identified to be injected using a MEDRAD® Intego automated injector similar number were also identified from the other period (manual injection). Results: Out of the 107-patient injected using MEDRAD® Intego automated injector, only 8 patients had deviation in the amount of radiopharmaceutical given to them that went outside the -5%to 5% range (graph1). Two patients had unstable intravenous cannula connection due to small and thin veins which resulted in a deviation of 20.37% and -23%. The other six patients were injected after the concentration of the 18F-FDG bulk was below 0.05ml/mCi which has been observed as a cause of higher than the average deviation. This results in increasing the delivered dose more than what is prescribed. While for the patients injected manually the deviation in the accuracy of the dose ranged from -21.87% to 145.1% (graph 2). The difference between the two methods is clearly observed and variation is by far away from the standard departmental protocol (graph 3). Conclusion: the usage of an automated injection system was found to deliver a more accurate dose than manual injections, thus less variation from the departmental policy and more consistent delivered doses per patient weight, few obstacles may hinder the actual delivery dose as prescribed and can be overcome by modification of the concentration of the bulk dose. ER -