Search

Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic value (sensitivity, specificity) of positron emission mammography (PEM) in a single site non-interventional study using the maximum PEM uptake value (PUVmax)., Patients, Methods: In a singlesite, non-interventional study, 108 patients (107 women, 1 man) with a total of 151 suspected lesions were scanned with a PEM Flex Solo II (Naviscan) at 90 min p.i. with 3.5 MBq 18F-FDG per kg of body weight. In this ROI(region of interest)-based analysis, maximum PEM uptake value (PUV) was determined in lesions, tumours (PUVmaxtumour), benign lesions (PUVmaxnormal breast) and also in healthy tissues on the contralateral side (PUVmaxcontralateral breast). These values were compared and contrasted. In addition, the ratios of PUVmaxtumour / PUVmaxcontralateral breast and PUVmaxnormal breast / PUVmaxcontralateral breast were compared. The image data were interpreted independently by two experienced nuclear medicine physicians and compared with histology in cases of suspected carcinoma., Results: Based on a criteria of PUV>1.9, 31 out of 151 lesions in the patient cohort were found to be malignant (21%). A mean PUVmaxtumour of 3.78 ± 2.47 was identified in malignant tumours, while a mean PUVmaxnormal breast of 1.17 ± 0.37 was reported in the glandular tissue of the healthy breast, with the difference being statistically significant (p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean ratio between tumour and healthy glandular tissue in breast cancer patients (3.15 ± 1.58) was found to be significantly higher than the ratio for benign lesions (1.17 ± 0.41, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: PEM is capable of differentiating breast tumours from benign lesions with 100% sensitivity along with a high specificity of 96%, when a threshold of PUVmax >1.9 is applied.

Purpose: Non-interventional study in outpatient, contrast-enhanced CT; 1. to determine the extent of preventive measures for risk reduction of adverse drug reactions after contrast-enhanced CT examinations. 2. to prospectively determine the incidence and severity of adverse drug reactions occurring after administration of the iso-osmolar contrast medium iodixanol. 3. to determine a possible influence of preventive measures on the incidence/severity of adverse drug reactions.., Materials and Methods: Evaluable documentation was provided for 9953 patients from 66 radiology centers across Germany. Patient characteristics, aspects of iodixanol administration, and adverse events with an at least "possible" relationship were documented on a standardized case report form (CRF) and were evaluated up to seven days after contrast medium administration., Results: About 55.5 % of patients showed one or more risk factors (e. g. impaired renal function 4.4 %, diabetes mellitus 8.5 %, hypertension 20.6 %). One third of the sites did not implement any preventive measures. Patients with a known risk for an allergy-like reaction were more likely to receive pharmacologic preventive treatment (0.5 - 50.5 %). Oral hydration was the main preventive measure in patients with renal risk factors (< 8 %) followed by intravenous hydration (1 %). Adverse drug reactions, mainly hypersensitivity reactions, occurred in 77 patients (0.74 %), but were classified as serious in only 3 patients (0.03 %). No statistically significant correlation between risk factors, preventive measures, and adverse reactions could be found., Conclusion: The use of preventive measures for CT examinations in this outpatient setting was generally low with risk patients being pre-medicated more often, depending on their history. In the routine outpatient setting, iso-osmolar iodixanol was very well tolerated in almost 10,000 patients undergoing diagnostic CT. The rate of acute and delayed adverse reactions was low. No correlation could be found between risk factors, preventive measures and the incidence of adverse drug reactions., Key Points: • Rare use of preventive measures for outpatient CT examinations.• Low rate of acute and late adverse drug reactions to iodixanol.• No correlation between risk factors, preventive measures and adverse drug reactions., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)