[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: EDE from FDG
Scott
It's not, however, considerably greater than the EDE from other nuc med
diagnostics, but, in fact, readily comparable. Somehow, it seems intuitively
"right" that it takes a bigger dose to get physiological data, than to get
anatomical data, doesn't it?
chris alston
At 10:41 05/12/98 -1000, you wrote:
>I was recently asked to compare the dose received from a PET exam to a
>chest x-ray. The best reference I found was in the Journal fo Nuclear
>Medicine 1991; 32:699-706. In Table 6, the EDE for an intravenous
>injection of FDG is stated as 2.4E-2 mGy/MBq.
>
>That would be 0.09 rad/mCi in nostalgic units. Considering a typical PET
>study may require 10 mCi of FDG, that means the EDE would be 0.9 rad,
>or 900 mrem.
>
>I was very surprised by the magnitude of this value. Table 3.27 of NCRP
>100 states the EDE of a chest exam to be 0.08 mSv, or 8 mrem. The EDE
>from a CT exam is stated as 1.11 mSv, or 111 mrem. The EDE from a
>barium enema exam is 4.06 mSv, 0r 406 mrem.
>
>As you can see, the EDE from a FDG PET exam is considerably greater
>than other diagnostic exams. This was news to me, so I thought it might
>be interesting to share with you.
>
> *****
>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Medphys at:
>http://www.mindspring.com/~sherouse/MPFAQ.html
>
>
>