open access
Comparative analysis of different nuclear medicine techniques in evaluation of renal function
, 1, 2, 3, 1
Affiliations- Faculty of Medicine Institute of Pathophysiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Ss Cyril and Methodius, Skopje, North Macedonia
- Institute of Physics at the Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, University Ss Cyril and Methodius, Skopje, Macedonia
- University Clinic of Nephrology, Skopje, North Macedonia
open access
Abstract
Introduction: Nuclear medicine (NM) methods play an important role in the evaluation of renal function in a wide range of clinical indications. The aim of our study was to evaluate the correlation between measured GFR (mGFR) obtained by the three-plasma sample slope-intercept NM method (TPSM) — reference method vs. estimated GFR (eGFR) using Fleming’s single plasma sample method (SPSM) at 120 min, 180 min, and 240 min and correlation of reference method with eGFR with camera-based Gates’ protocol.
Material and methods: A total of 82 subjects (33 male/49 female) with a mean age of 54.87 ± 15.65 years were included and mGFR value was obtained by the three-plasma sample slope-intercept NM method and eGFR was obtained with Fleming’s single sample method. eGFR was also quantified with the camera-based Gates’ protocol after i.v. application of [99mTc]Tc-DTPA.
Results: Our study revealed a very strong positive significant correlation between all three SPSMs with the TPSM as the reference method. Between the Gates’ method and the TPSM in the group of patients with mGFR ≥ 61–84 mL/min/1.73 m2 and mGFR ≥ 84 mL/min/1.73 m2, a moderate positive statistically significant correlation was obtained.
Conclusions: The SPSM method shows a very strong correlation with the reference and low bias in all three groups of patients and can be routinely used for GFR estimation.
Abstract
Introduction: Nuclear medicine (NM) methods play an important role in the evaluation of renal function in a wide range of clinical indications. The aim of our study was to evaluate the correlation between measured GFR (mGFR) obtained by the three-plasma sample slope-intercept NM method (TPSM) — reference method vs. estimated GFR (eGFR) using Fleming’s single plasma sample method (SPSM) at 120 min, 180 min, and 240 min and correlation of reference method with eGFR with camera-based Gates’ protocol.
Material and methods: A total of 82 subjects (33 male/49 female) with a mean age of 54.87 ± 15.65 years were included and mGFR value was obtained by the three-plasma sample slope-intercept NM method and eGFR was obtained with Fleming’s single sample method. eGFR was also quantified with the camera-based Gates’ protocol after i.v. application of [99mTc]Tc-DTPA.
Results: Our study revealed a very strong positive significant correlation between all three SPSMs with the TPSM as the reference method. Between the Gates’ method and the TPSM in the group of patients with mGFR ≥ 61–84 mL/min/1.73 m2 and mGFR ≥ 84 mL/min/1.73 m2, a moderate positive statistically significant correlation was obtained.
Conclusions: The SPSM method shows a very strong correlation with the reference and low bias in all three groups of patients and can be routinely used for GFR estimation.
Keywords
GFR, [99mTc]Tc-DTPA, plasma sampling, slope-intercept method, Fleming’s single sample method, Gates method
About this articleTitle
Comparative analysis of different nuclear medicine techniques in evaluation of renal function
Journal
Issue
Vol 26 (2023): Continuous Publishing
Article type
Research paper
Pages
85-95
Published online
2023-07-11
Page views
1276
Article views/downloads
461
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Nucl. Med. Rev 2023;26:85-95.
Keywords
GFR
[99mTc]Tc-DTPA
plasma sampling
slope-intercept method
Fleming’s single sample method
Gates method
Authors
Aleksandra Peshevska
Tanja Makazlieva
Venjamin Majstorov
Lambe Barandovski
Irena Rambabova-Bushljetik
Daniela Miladinova
References (24)- O’Malley J, Ziessman H. Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging: the requisites 5th ed. Elsevier Health Sciences 2020.
- Blaufox MD, De Palma D, Taylor A, et al. The SNMMI and EANM practice guideline for renal scintigraphy in adults. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018; 45(12): 2218–2228.
- Murray AW, Barnfield MC, Waller ML, et al. Assessment of glomerular filtration rate measurement with plasma sampling: a technical review. J Nucl Med Technol. 2013; 41(2): 67–75.
- Chapter 1: Definition and classification of CKD. Kidney Int Suppl (2011). 2013; 3(1): 19–62.
- Vidal-Petiot E, Courbebaisse M, Livrozet M, et al. Comparison of Cr-EDTA and Tc-DTPA for glomerular filtration rate measurement. J Nephrol. 2021; 34(3): 729–737.
- Hsu CY, Bansal N. Measured GFR as "gold standard"--all that glitters is not gold? Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011; 6(8): 1813–1814.
- Fleming JS, Zivanovic MA, Blake GM, et al. British Nuclear Medicine Society. Guidelines for the measurement of glomerular filtration rate using plasma sampling. Nucl Med Commun. 2004; 25(8): 759–769.
- Kumar M, Arora G, Damle NA, et al. Comparison between Two-sample Method with Tc-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid, Gates' Method and Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Values by Formula Based Methods in Healthy Kidney Donor Population. Indian J Nucl Med. 2017; 32(3): 188–193.
- Rehling M, Møller ML, Thamdrup B, et al. Simultaneous measurement of renal clearance and plasma clearance of 99mTc-labelled diethylenetriaminepenta-acetate, 51Cr-labelled ethylenediaminetetra-acetate and inulin in man. Clin Sci (Lond). 1984; 66(5): 613–619.
- Speeckaert MM, Seegmiller J, Glorieux G, et al. Measured glomerular filtration rate: the query for a workable golden standard technique. J Pers Med. 2021; 11(10).
- Waller DG, Keast CM, Fleming JS, et al. Measurement of glomerular filtration rate with technetium-99m DTPA: comparison of plasma clearance techniques. J Nucl Med. 1987; 28(3): 372–377.
- Brøchner-Mortensen J. Current status on assessment and measurement of glomerular filtration rate. Clin Physiol. 1985; 5(1): 1–17.
- Gref MC, Karp KH. Single-sample 99mTc-diethylenetriamine penta-acetate plasma clearance in advanced renal failure by the mean sojourn time approach. Nucl Med Commun. 2009; 30(3): 202–205.
- Burniston M. Clinical Guideline for the measurment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) using plasma sampling. Approved by the British Nuclear Medicine Society Professional Standards Committee. 2018. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.bnms.org.uk/resource/resmgr/guidelines/bnms_gfr_guidelines_in_bnms_.pdf (19.02.2023).
- Osman AO, Elmadani AE. Comparison of slope-intercept with single plasma sample methods in estimating glomerular filtration rate using radionuclides. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2014; 25(2): 321–325.
- Fleming JS, Persaud L, Ralls K, et al. Quality control of two-sample GFR measurements using single-sample estimates. Nucl Med Commun. 2002; 23(4): 389.
- Fleming JS, Persaud L, Zivanovic MA. A general equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate from a single plasma sample. Nucl Med Commun. 2005; 26(8): 743–748.
- Delanaye P, Flamant M, Dubourg L, et al. Single- versus multiple-sample method to measure glomerular filtration rate. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2018; 33(10): 1778–1785.
- Gaspari F, Guerini E, Perico N, et al. Glomerular filtration rate determined from a single plasma sample after intravenous iohexol injection: is it reliable? J Am Soc Nephrol. 1996; 7(12): 2689–2693.
- Mulligan JS, Blue PW, Hasbargen JA. Methods for measuring GFR with technetium-99m-DTPA: an analysis of several common methods. J Nucl Med. 1990; 31(7): 1211–1219.
- De Santo NG, Anastasio P, Cirillo M, et al. Measurement of glomerular filtration rate by the 99mTc-DTPA renogram is less precise than measured and predicted creatinine clearance. Nephron. 1999; 81(2): 136–140.
- Galli G, Rufini V, Vellante C, et al. Estimation of glomerular filtration rate with 99Tc(m)-DTPA: a comparative assessment of simplified methods. Nucl Med Commun. 1997; 18(7): 634–641.
- Russell CD, Dubovsky EV, Russell CD, et al. Measurement of glomerular filtration rate: single injection plasma clearance method without urine collection. J Nucl Med. 1985; 26(11): 1243–1247.
- Dias AH, Pintão S, Almeida P, et al. Comparison of GFR calculation methods: MDRD and CKD-EPI vs. (99m)Tc-DTPA tracer clearance rates. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2013; 73(4): 334–338.
