11 research outputs found
Sperm transfer and paternity in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata: large variance in traits favoured by post-copulatory episodes of sexual selection
Controlled release of estradiol-17beta and bisphenol A from a silicone tube for long-term administration in mice
Test of Gross Motor Development-3 (TGMD-3) with the Use of Visual Supports for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Validity and Reliability
Opportunities for improvement on current nuclear cardiology practices and radiation exposure in Latin America: Findings from the 65-country IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols cross-sectional Study (INCAPS)
Background: Comparison of Latin American (LA) nuclear cardiology (NC) practice with that in the rest of the world (RoW) will identify areas for improvement and lead to educational activities to reduce radiation exposure from NC. Methods and Results: INCAPS collected data on all SPECT and PET procedures performed during a single week in March-April 2013 in 36 laboratories in 10 LA countries (n = 1139), and 272 laboratories in 55 countries in RoW (n = 6772). Eight “best practices” were identified a priori and a radiation-related Quality Index (QI) was devised indicating the number used. Mean radiation effective dose (ED) in LA was higher than in RoW (11.8 vs 9.1 mSv, p < 0.001). Within a populous country like Brazil, a wide variation in laboratory mean ED was found, ranging from 8.4 to 17.8 mSv. Only 11% of LA laboratories achieved median ED <9 mSv, compared to 32% in RoW (p < 0.001). QIs ranged from 2 in a laboratory in Mexico to 7 in a laboratory in Cuba. Three major opportunities to reduce ED for LA patients were identified: (1) more laboratories could implement stress-only imaging, (2) camera-based methods of ED reduction, including prone imaging, could be more frequently used, and (3) injected activity of 99mTc could be adjusted reflecting patient weight/habitus. Conclusions: On average, radiation dose from NC is higher in LA compared to RoW, with median laboratory ED <9 mSv achieved only one third as frequently as in RoW. Opportunities to reduce radiation exposure in LA have been identified and guideline-based recommendations made to optimize protocols and adhere to the “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principle
Impact of age on the selection of nuclear cardiology stress protocols: The INCAPS (IAEA nuclear cardiology protocols) study
Background: There is growing concern about radiation exposure from nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), particularly among younger patients who are more prone to develop untoward effects of ionizing radiation, and hence US and European professional society guidelines recommend age as a consideration in weighing radiation risk from MPI. We aimed to determine how patient radiation doses from MPI vary across age groups in a large contemporary international cohort. Methods: Data were collected as part of a global cross-sectional study of centers performing MPI coordinated by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Sites provided information on each MPI study completed during a single week in March–April 2013. We compared across age groups laboratory adherence to pre-specified radiation-related best practices, radiation effective dose (ED; a whole-body measure reflecting the amount of radiation to each organ and its relative sensitivity to radiation's deleterious effects), and the proportion of patients with ED ≤ 9 mSv, a target level specified in guidelines. Results: Among 7911 patients undergoing MPI in 308 laboratories in 65 countries, mean ED was 10.0 ± 4.5 mSv with slightly higher exposure among younger age groups (trend p value < 0.001). There was no difference in the proportion of patients with ED ≤ 9 mSv across age groups, or in adherence to best practices based on the median age of patients in a laboratory. Conclusions: In contemporary nuclear cardiology practice, the age of the patient appears not to impact protocol selection and radiation dose, contrary to professional society guidelines
Nuclear cardiology practice and associated radiation doses in Europe: results of the IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Study (INCAPS) for the 27 European countries
PURPOSE: Nuclear cardiology is widely used to diagnose coronary artery disease and to guide patient management, but data on current practices, radiation dose-related best practices, and radiation doses are scarce. To address these issues, the IAEA conducted a worldwide study of nuclear cardiology practice. We present the European subanalysis. METHODS: In March 2013, the IAEA invited laboratories across the world to document all SPECT and PET studies performed in one week. The data included age, gender, weight, radiopharmaceuticals, injected activities, camera type, positioning, hardware and software. Radiation effective dose was calculated for each patient. A quality score was defined for each laboratory as the number followed of eight predefined best practices with a bearing on radiation exposure (range of quality score 0 - 8). The participating European countries were assigned to regions (North, East, South, and West). Comparisons were performed between the four European regions and between Europe and the rest-of-the-world (RoW). RESULTS: Data on 2,381 European patients undergoing nuclear cardiology procedures in 102 laboratories in 27 countries were collected. A cardiac SPECT study was performed in 97.9 % of the patients, and a PET study in 2.1 %. The average effective dose of SPECT was 8.0 ± 3.4 mSv (RoW 11.4 ± 4.3 mSv; P < 0.001) and of PET was 2.6 ± 1.5 mSv (RoW 3.8 ± 2.5 mSv; P < 0.001). The mean effective doses of SPECT and PET differed between European regions (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). The mean quality score was 6.2 ± 1.2, which was higher than the RoW score (5.0 ± 1.1; P < 0.001). Adherence to best practices did not differ significantly among the European regions (range 6 to 6.4; P = 0.73). Of the best practices, stress-only imaging and weight-adjusted dosing were the least commonly used. CONCLUSION: In Europe, the mean effective dose from nuclear cardiology is lower and the average quality score is higher than in the RoW. There is regional variation in effective dose in relation to the best practice quality score. A possible reason for the differences between Europe and the RoW could be the safety culture fostered by actions under the Euratom directives and the implementation of diagnostic reference levels. Stress-only imaging and weight-adjusted activity might be targets for optimization of European nuclear cardiology practice