The investigation of lesion detection performances of gamma probe and gamma camera using a lymph nodes model

Abstract

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study is to investigate lesion detection performances of gamma probe and gamma camera. METHODS Four cylindrical lesions with 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8 cm diameter were placed in a phantom to simulate lymph nodes. The images of phantom placed within water were taken with gamma camera and counts of lesion were taken from mimicking lymph nodes using a gamma probe. RESULTS It was determined that lymph node with 0.1 ml volume can be only detected up to 4 cm depth with gamma camera. But, this lesion can be detected up to 7 cm depth when gamma probe is used. CONCLUSION Gamma probe is more effective compared to gamma camera with respect to their lesion detection capacities. The smallest lymph node that gamma camera could identify clearly had a 0.1 cm diameter at 4 cm depth whereas gamma probe could identify the same size up to 7 cm depth.

Keywords

• Molecular Probe Techniques,Gamma Cameras,Radionuclide Imaging,Lymph Nodes,Radioisotopes

Gama prob ve gama kameranın lezyon tespit etkinliklerinin lenf düğümleri modeli ile araştırılması

Abstract

AMAÇ Farklı boyutlardaki lenf düğümlerini taklit eden bir model kullanılarak, bu taklit lenf düğümlerinin yerinin ve derinliğinin belirlenmesinde gama kamera ve gama probun etkinliği araştırıldı. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Lenf düğümlerini taklit etmek üzere çapları 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 ve 0.8 cm olan dört silindirik lezyon fantoma monte edildi. Görüntüler ve sayımlar, fantom su içinde iken farklı derinliklerde gama kamera ve gama prob ile alındı. BULGULAR Gama kamera ile 0.1 ml hacimli lenf düğümünün en fazla 4 cm derinlikte tespit edilebileceği belirlendi. Aynı boyuttaki taklit lenf düğümünün gama prob değerlendirmesinde ise 7 cm derinliğe kadar varlığının tespit edilebildiği görüldü. SONUÇ Lenf düğümlerinin yerinin belirlenmesinde, gama probun gama kameraya göre daha etkin olduğu görüldü. Gama kamera ile en küçük boyuttaki (0.1 ml) lenf düğümünün 4 cm derinlikteki yeri tespit edilebilirken, gama prob ile aynı lenf düğümünün 7 cm derinlikteki varlığı tespit edilebilmektedir.

Keywords

• Gama prob, gama kamera, sentinel lenf düğümü, Tc-99m

References

1. 1. Aygen M, Mudun A, Mudun S, Kurul S, Çaml›ca H, Büyükbabani N, et al. Malign melanomda sentinel lenf nodunun saptanmas›nda geliflen yöntemler. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi 2000;15(2):51-6.
2. 2. Leong SP. Sentinel lymph node mapping and selective lymphadenectomy: the standard of care for melanoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2004;5(3):185-94.
3. 3. Leong SP, Steinmetz I, Habib FA, McMillan A, Gans JZ, Allen RE Jr, et al. Optimal selective sentinel lymph node dissection in primary malignant melanoma. Arch Surg 1997;132(6):666-73.
4. 4. McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI, Wong SL, Gershenwald JE, Krag DN, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: how many radioactive nodes should be removed? Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8(3):192- 7.
5. 5. Yip TC, Ege GN. Determination of depth distribution of internal mammary lymph nodes on lateral lym phoscintigraphy. Clin Radiol 1985;36(2):149-52.
6. 6. Alazraki NP, Styblo T, Grant SF, Cohen C, Larsen T, Aarsvold JN. Sentinel node staging of early breast cancer using lymphoscintigraphy and the intraoperative gamma-detecting probe. Semin Nucl Med 2000;30(1):56-64.
7. 7. Demir M. Nükleer t›p fizi¤i. ‹stanbul Üniversitesi yay›nlar›, No: 4252, Ankara: AB Ofset; 2000 p. 80-3.
8. 8. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm FK, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992;127(4):392-9.

9. 9. Tsuchimochi M, Sakahara H, Hayama K, Funaki M, Ohno R, Shirahata T, et al. A prototype small CdTe gamma camera for radioguided surgery and other imaging applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30(12):1605-14.
10. 10. Henkin RE, Boles MA, Gary LD, et al. 1996, Nuclear medicine. Managing Edit by Corra, E., Publisher, Patterson, A., Mosby, USA, [ISBN: 0-8016-7701-7].
11. 11. Coleman RE, Laymon CM, Turkington TG. FDG imaging of lung nodules: a phantom study comparing S P E C T, camera-based PET, and dedicated PET. Radiology 1999;210(3):823-8.
12. 12.Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM, Joseph E, Shons AR, Yeatman T, et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 1998;227(5):645-53.
13. 13. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox C, Yeatman T, Balducci L, Ku N, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA 1996;276(22):1818-22.
14. 14. Kapteijn BA, Nieweg OE, Liem I, Mooi WJ, Balm AJ, Muller SH, et al. Localizing the sentinel node in cutaneous melanoma: gamma probe detection versus blue dye. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4(2):156-60.
15. 15. H o ffman EJ, Tornai MP, Janecek M, Patt BE, Iwanczyk JS. Intraoperative probes and imaging probes. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26(8):913-35.
16. 16. Tiourina T, Arends B, Huysmans D, Rutten H, Lemaire B, Muller S. Evaluation of surgical gamma probes for radioguided sentinel node localisation. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25(9):1224-31.
17. 17. Perez-Andujar A, Pibida L. Performance of CdTe, HPGe and NaI(Tl) detectors for radioactivity measurements. Appl Radiat Isot 2004;60(1):41-7.
18. 18.Barber HB, Barrett HH, Hickernell TS, Kwo DP, Woolfenden JM, Entine G, et al. Comparison of NaI(Tl), CdTe, and HgI2 surgical probes: physical characterization. Med Phys 1991;18(3):373-81.
19. 19.Chandra R. Nuclear medicine physics. 5 t h e d . Philadelphia: Williams and Wilkins; 1998. p. 82-3.
20. 20. Sorenson JA, Phelp ME. Physics in nuclear medicine. 2nd ed., Los Angeles: Grune and Stratton; 1989. p. 115-42.
21. 21. Demir M, Halaç M, Uslu ‹. Meme tümörü, lenf dü¤ümü modelinde lezyon deteksiyonu. Turk J Nucl Med 2003;12:149-53.