Lateral Posterior Method for Depth Correction while Using the Gates Protocol for GFR Estimation: Is it Comparable to the Gold Standard GFR Estimation by Plasma Sampling?

IF 0.6 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Shefali Madhur Gokhale
{"title":"Lateral Posterior Method for Depth Correction while Using the Gates Protocol for GFR Estimation: Is it Comparable to the Gold Standard GFR Estimation by Plasma Sampling?","authors":"Shefali Madhur Gokhale","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1787100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation by Gates protocol using the gamma camera for diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) dynamic renography has not compared well with the gold standard GFR by plasma sampling method. This is because depth of the kidneys is generally not considered. Our aim was to study whether manual depth correction using the skin to middle of kidney distance in lateral view and posterior aspect-lateral posterior method would reduce the bias in the Gates GFR as compared with the gold standard.\n Materials and Methods Retrospective study of 27 adult prospective renal donors who underwent GFR by plasma sampling and DTPA dynamic renography at Inlaks and Budhrani Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India between January 2022 and April 2023. The entire data was statistically analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS ver 21.0, IBM Corporation, United States) for MS Windows.\n Results There is no significant agreement between plasma sampling versus gamma camera method and plasma sampling versus lateral posterior method for depth correction for GFR measurements; however, the evidence of systemic bias is lower for the gamma camera method compared with the lateral posterior method for depth correction as against the plasma sampling method.\n Conclusion The lateral posterior method for depth correction while using the gamma camera-based Gates protocol is not a reliable method for depth correction in the western Indian adult population with preserved renal function.","PeriodicalId":23742,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Nuclear Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Nuclear Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation by Gates protocol using the gamma camera for diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) dynamic renography has not compared well with the gold standard GFR by plasma sampling method. This is because depth of the kidneys is generally not considered. Our aim was to study whether manual depth correction using the skin to middle of kidney distance in lateral view and posterior aspect-lateral posterior method would reduce the bias in the Gates GFR as compared with the gold standard. Materials and Methods Retrospective study of 27 adult prospective renal donors who underwent GFR by plasma sampling and DTPA dynamic renography at Inlaks and Budhrani Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India between January 2022 and April 2023. The entire data was statistically analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS ver 21.0, IBM Corporation, United States) for MS Windows. Results There is no significant agreement between plasma sampling versus gamma camera method and plasma sampling versus lateral posterior method for depth correction for GFR measurements; however, the evidence of systemic bias is lower for the gamma camera method compared with the lateral posterior method for depth correction as against the plasma sampling method. Conclusion The lateral posterior method for depth correction while using the gamma camera-based Gates protocol is not a reliable method for depth correction in the western Indian adult population with preserved renal function.
使用盖茨方案估算 GFR 时的侧后方深度校正法:它与通过血浆采样估算 GFR 的黄金标准相媲美吗?
背景盖茨方案使用伽马相机进行二乙烯三胺五乙酸(DTPA)动态肾脏造影术估算肾小球滤过率(GFR),但与金标准的血浆取样法相比效果并不理想。这是因为一般不考虑肾脏的深度。我们的目的是研究在侧视图中使用皮肤到肾中间的距离和后侧-侧后方法进行手动深度校正是否会减少盖茨 GFR 与金标准相比的偏差。材料和方法 对 2022 年 1 月至 2023 年 4 月期间在印度马哈拉施特拉邦普纳 Inlaks 和 Budhrani 医院通过血浆采样和 DTPA 动态肾图进行 GFR 检查的 27 名成年前瞻性肾脏捐献者进行回顾性研究。所有数据均使用 MS Windows 版社会科学统计软件包(SPSS 21.0 版,美国 IBM 公司)进行统计分析。结果 在 GFR 测量的深度校正方面,等离子体取样法与伽马相机法、等离子体取样法与侧后方法之间没有明显的一致性;但是,伽马相机法与侧后方法相比,在深度校正方面的系统偏差证据低于等离子体取样法。结论 在肾功能保存完好的印度西部成年人群中,使用基于伽马相机的盖茨方案进行深度校正的侧后方方法不是一种可靠的深度校正方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Nuclear Medicine
World Journal of Nuclear Medicine RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
118
审稿时长
48 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信