Gastric Emptying Solid-Meal Content and Misinformation on Social Media Platforms.

Several nuclear medicine technologist-specific groups exist on social media sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn. Although these sites provide a valuable resource and forum for technologists to interact and pose questions, any recommendations, especially those regarding patient care, should be carefully scrutinized and evaluated on the basis of scientific merit and not opinion. Recently, an assortment of unvalidated ingredients for solid-meal gastric emptying scintigraphy has been suggested on these social media sites. Often, these ingredients do not comply with the peer-reviewed guidelines and can potentially produce unreliable results and misdiagnosis. Thus, before implementing advice from an unvetted source, technologists must distinguish between low- and high-quality information. Currency, reliability, authority, and purpose-a test of the trustworthiness of an information source-can help technologists evaluate recommendations and avoid the use of unsupported solid-meal gastric emptying scintigraphy ingredients.

Reexamining Compliance with Gastric Emptying Scintigraphy Guidelines: An Updated Analysis of the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Database.

Many variables can influence the results of gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES). A lack of standardization causes variability, limits comparisons, and decreases the credibility of the study. To increase standardization, in 2009 the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) published a guideline for a standardized, validated GES protocol for adults based on a 2008 consensus document. Laboratories must closely follow the consensus guideline to provide valid and standardized results as an incentive to achieve consistency in patient care. As part of the accreditation process, the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) evaluates compliance with such guidelines. The rate of compliance with the SNMMI guideline was assessed in 2016 and showed a substantial degree of noncompliance. The aim of this study was to reassess compliance with the standardized protocol across the same cohort of laboratories, looking for changes and trends. Methods: The IAC nuclear/PET database was used to extract GES protocols from all laboratories applying for accreditation from 2018 to 2021, 5 y after the initial assessment. The number of labs was 118 (vs. 127 in the initial assessment). Each protocol was again evaluated for compliance with the methods described in the SNMMI guideline. The same 14 variables were assessed in a binary fashion: patient preparation (4 variables-types of medications withheld, withholding of these medication for 48 h, blood glucose ≤ 200 mg/dL, blood glucose recorded), meal (5 variables-use of consensus meal, nothing by mouth for 4 h or more, meal consumed within 10 min, documentation of percentage of meal consumed, meal labeled with 18.5-37 MBq [0.5-1.0 mCi]), acquisition (2 variables-anterior and posterior projections obtained, imaging each hour out to 4 h), and processing (3 variables-use of the geometric mean, decay correction of data, and measurement of percentage retention). Results: Protocols from the 118 labs demonstrated that compliance is improving in some key areas but remains suboptimal in others. Overall, labs were compliant with an average of 8 of the 14 variables, with a low of 1-variable compliance at 1 site, and only 4 sites compliant with all 14 variables. Nineteen sites met an 80% threshold for compliance (11+ variables). The variable with the highest compliance was the patient's taking nothing by mouth for 4 h or more before the exam (97%). The variable with the lowest compliance was the recording of blood glucose values (3%). Notable areas of improvement include the use of the consensus meal, now 62% versus previously only 30% of labs. Greater compliance was also noted with measurement of retention percentages (instead of emptying percentages or half-times), with compliance by 65% of sites versus only 35% 5 y prior. Conclusion: Almost 13 y after the publication of the SNMMI GES guidelines, there is improving but still suboptimal protocol adherence among laboratories applying for IAC accreditation. Persistent variation in the performance of GES protocols may significantly affect patient management, as results may be unreliable. Using the standardized GES protocol permits interpretation of results in a consistent manner that allows interlaboratory comparisons and fosters acceptance of the test validity by referring clinicians.

A Quick Guide to Writing a Teaching Case Study.

Case studies published in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology are brief chronologic or logical descriptions of a clinical experience that aim to share a technical outcome associated with an instrumentation or patient care scenario or demonstrate a unique finding associated with a nuclear medicine procedure. Although brief by necessity, case studies provide enough relevant detail to educate the reader about a clinical condition coupled with a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. Case studies do not have to be about bizarre clinical conditions. Case studies can be about quality issues that directly impact the imaging or therapeutic procedure, protocol modifications when a clinical scenario requires out-of-the-box decisions, new techniques developed to address unique or difficult situations, or something as simple as an artifact that resulted in an unusual image finding. The sections of a case study, including the introduction, case report, discussion, and conclusion, are explained. The goal of this article is to teach new authors how to write a teaching case study.

Crafting a Compelling Abstract That Gets Accepted.

Presenting an abstract at the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging annual meeting is an opportunity to gain peer recognition and share knowledge. This article explains how to craft a winning conference abstract. The goal of an abstract is to summarize the main points of a research project or topic. There are 2 types of abstracts: scientific and educational. Scientific abstracts generally involve data collection or a survey and follow a specific formula. The introduction provides a brief background and states the research question. The methods describe the study design and variables. The results present key findings, and the conclusion summarizes the findings' implications and significance. Educational abstracts are unstructured and usually describe a single topic, such as a case study, literature review, or new technique. Crafting an abstract requires clear communication, attention to detail, and an emphasis on practical applications. Effectively structuring a compelling abstract increases your abstract's acceptance chances.

Cardiac Amyloidosis Imaging, Part 2: Quantification and Technical Considerations.

99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging has been around for a long time. In the 1970s, it was used to image recent myocardial infarction. However, it has recently been recognized for its value in detecting cardiac amyloidosis, leading to widespread use across the United States. Increased use led to considerable procedure variability. As the evidence base to support formal guidelines was being developed, experts from several professional medical societies issued imaging and interpretation recommendations titled "ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI Expert Consensus Recommendations for Multimodality Imaging in Cardiac Amyloidosis: part 1 of 2-Evidence Base and Standardized Methods of Imaging." To reach a consensus on a protocol that would benefit the bulk of laboratories, the experts considered several parameters and radiotracer kinetics. The most critical parameters concerned injection-to-imaging delay and planar imaging versus SPECT. Accordingly, the standardized protocol recommends the injection of 370-740 MBq (10-20 mCi) of 99mTc-pyrophosphate with imaging 3 h later. Planar images of the chest are acquired in the anterior and lateral views accompanied by SPECT images. Both the planar and the SPECT images are used to semiquantitatively grade the degree of myocardial uptake compared with the amount of uptake in the ribs using a 0-3 scale. A grade of 2 or 3 on the SPECT images is considered positive for cardiac amyloidosis. The planar images are used to calculate a heart-to-contralateral-lung ratio. A ratio greater than 1.3 at 3 h helps to confirm the diagnosis of cardiac amyloid if the SPECT images have positive findings. This article is part of a 3-part series in this issue of the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology Part 1 details the etiology of cardiac amyloidosis and 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging acquisition parameters. Part 2, this article, describes the procedure evolution over 50 y, image processing, and quantification. It further discusses radiotracer kinetics and 2 important technical considerations: injection-to-imaging delay and planar imaging versus SPECT. Part 3 covers study interpretation along with cardiac amyloidosis diagnosis and treatment.

Cardiac Amyloidosis Imaging, Part 1: Amyloidosis Etiology and Image Acquisition.

Cardiac amyloidosis is a systemic form of amyloidosis in which protein-based infiltrates are deposited in myocardial extracellular space. The accumulation of amyloid fibrils causes the myocardium to thicken and stiffen, leading to diastolic dysfunction and, eventually, heart failure. Until recently, cardiac amyloidosis was considered rare. However, the recent adoption of noninvasive diagnostic testing, including 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging, has revealed a previously undiagnosed sizable disease prevalence. Light-chain amyloidosis (AL) and transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR), the 2 primary types, account for 95% of cardiac amyloidosis diagnoses. AL results from plasma cell dyscrasia and has a very poor prognosis. The usual treatment for cardiac AL is chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Cardiac ATTR is more chronic, usually resulting from age-related instability and misfolding of the transthyretin protein. ATTR is treated by managing heart failure and using new pharmacotherapeutic drugs. 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging can efficiently and effectively distinguish between ATTR and cardiac AL. Although the exact mechanism of myocardial 99mTc-pyrophosphate uptake is unknown, it is believed to bind to amyloid plaque microcalcifications. 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging has a 97% sensitivity and nearly 100% sensitivity for identifying cardiac ATTR when the AL form of the disease is ruled out through serum free light-chain and serum and urine protein electrophoresis with immunofixation testing. Although there are no published 99mTc-pyrophosphate cardiac amyloidosis imaging guidelines, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and others have published consensus recommendations to standardize test performance and interpretation. This article, part 1 of a 3-part series in this issue of the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology, describes amyloidosis etiology and cardiac amyloidosis characteristics, including the types, prevalence, signs and symptoms, and disease course. It further explains the scan acquisition protocol. Part 2 of the series focuses on image/data quantification and technical considerations. Finally, part 3 describes scan interpretation, along with the diagnosis and treatment of cardiac amyloidosis.

Cardiac Amyloidosis Imaging, Part 3: Interpretation, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Cardiac amyloidosis was thought to be rare, undiagnosable, and incurable. However, recently it has been discovered to be common, diagnosable, and treatable. This knowledge has led to a resurgence in nuclear imaging with 99mTc-pyrophosphate-a scan once believed to be extinct-to identify cardiac amyloidosis, particularly in patients with heart failure but preserved ejection fraction. The renewed interest in 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging has compelled technologists and physicians to reacquaint themselves with the procedure. Although 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging is relatively simple, interpretation and diagnostic accuracy require an in-depth knowledge of amyloidosis etiology, clinical manifestations, disease progression, and treatment. Diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis is complicated because typical signs and symptoms are nonspecific and usually attributed to other cardiac disorders. In addition, physicians must be able to differentiate between monoclonal immunoglobulin light-chain amyloidosis (AL) and transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR). Several clinical and noninvasive diagnostic imaging (echocardiography and cardiac MRI) red flags have been identified that suggest a patient may have cardiac amyloidosis. The intent of these red flags is to raise physician suspicion of cardiac amyloidosis and guide a series of steps (a diagnostic algorithm) for narrowing down and diagnosing the specific amyloid type. One element in the diagnostic algorithm is to identify monoclonal proteins indicative of AL. Monoclonal proteins are detected by serum or urine immunofixation electrophoresis and serum free light-chain assay. Another element is identifying and grading cardiac amyloid deposition using 99mTc-pyrophosphate imaging. When monoclonal proteins are present and the 99mTc-pyrophosphate scan is positive, the patient should be further evaluated for cardiac AL. The absence of monoclonal proteins and a positive 99mTc-pyrophosphate scan is diagnostic for cardiac ATTR. Patients with cardiac ATTR need to undergo genetic testing to differentiate between wild-type ATTR and variant ATTR. This article is the third in a 3-part series in this issue of the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology Part 1 reviewed amyloidosis etiology and outlined 99mTc-pyrophosphate study acquisition. Part 2 described 99mTc-pyrophosphate image quantification and protocol technical considerations. This article discusses scan interpretation along with cardiac amyloidosis diagnosis and treatment.

Variation in Carotid Artery Stenosis Measurements Among Facilities Seeking Carotid Stenting Facility Accreditation.

BACKGROUND: Based on the inclusion criteria of clinical trials, the degree of cervical carotid artery stenosis is often used as an indication for stent placement in the setting of extracranial carotid atherosclerotic disease. However, the rigor and consistency with which stenosis is measured outside of clinical trials are unclear. In an agreement study using a cross-sectional sample, we compared the percent stenosis as measured by real-world physician operators to that measured by independent expert reviewers. METHODS: As part of the carotid stenting facility accreditation review, images were obtained from 68 cases of patients who underwent carotid stent placement. Data collected included demographics, stroke severity measures, and the documented degree of stenosis, termed operator-reported stenosis (ORS), by 34 operators from 14 clinical sites. The ORS was compared with reviewer-measured stenosis (RMS) as assessed by 5 clinicians experienced in treating carotid artery disease. RESULTS: The median ORS was 90.0% (interquartile range, 80.0%-90.0%) versus a median RMS of 61.1% (interquartile range, 49.8%-73.6%), with a median difference of 21.8% (interquartile range, 13.7%-34.4%), P<0.001. The median difference in ORS and RMS for asymptomatic versus symptomatic patients was not statistically different (24.6% versus 19.6%; P=0.406). The median difference between ORS and RMS for facilities granted initial accreditation was smaller compared with facilities whose accreditation was delayed (17.9% versus 25.5%, P=0.035). The intraclass correlation between ORS and RMS was 0.16, indicating poor agreement. If RMS measurements were used, 72% of symptomatic patients and 10% of asymptomatic patients in the population examined would meet the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services criteria for stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world operators tend to overestimate carotid artery stenosis compared with external expert reviewers. Measurements from facilities granted initial accreditation were closer to expert measurements than those from facilities whose accreditation was delayed. Since decisions regarding carotid revascularization are often based on percent stenosis, such measuring discrepancies likely lead to increased procedural utilization.

Improving DXA Quality by Avoiding Common Technical and Diagnostic Pitfalls: Part 1.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is an accurate means to assess bone mineral density, determine the risk of a fragility fracture, and monitor response to therapy. Despite its seemingly straightforward nature-the review of 2-to-3 nondiagnostic images and a few automatically generated numbers-the proper performance and interpretation of DXA can often be complex. It is complex because it is highly dependent on many factors, such as image acquisition, processing, analysis, and subsequent examination interpretation. Each step is subject to potential errors, artifacts, and diagnostic pitfalls; hence, meticulous attention must be paid to the technique by both the technologist and the interpreting physician to provide high-quality results and, in turn, maximize the examination's clinical utility. This article is part 1 of a 2-part series. Part 1 will begin with a review of bone physiology and osteoporosis etiology, followed by a discussion of the principles underlying DXA and the technical procedure. Part 2 will focus on DXA interpretation and discuss scanning pitfalls and clues to recognizing issues and improving scan quality.

Root Cause Analysis in Nuclear Medicine for Sentinel Events.

A sentinel event is any unexpected event that results in death or serious physical or psychological injury to a patient unrelated to a patient's illness. Establishing and determining cause-and-effect relationships is key to preventing future sentinel/near-miss events. However, it can be challenging to establish a cause-and-effect relationship when a process involves multiple steps or people. Root cause analysis (RCA) is a technique that can pinpoint the causes of sentinel events for medical procedures involving numerous steps and people. This article provides a rationale for RCA and the basic steps in a nonmedical RCA investigation. The article then describes a more detailed, nine-step RCA approach for investigating sentinel events and illustrates the technique with a nuclear medicine example.

Diuretic Renal Scintigraphy Protocol Considerations.

Diuretic renal scintigraphy plays a critical diagnostic role by providing a physiologic means for differentiating between obstructive and nonobstructive hydronephrosis as well as assessing the function of the affected kidney. The exam accuracy is highly dependent upon and benefits from close attention to the protocol. This article reviews kidney anatomy and physiology, patient preparation, available radiopharmaceuticals, diuretic administration, acquisition, processing, quantification, and interpretation criteria.

Diuretic Renal Scintigraphy: The State of Practice and a Potential Opportunity for Standardization.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess variation in diuretic renal scintigraphy (DRS) practice patterns and quantify compliance with the national guidance in a large cohort of laboratories from different institutions and practice settings across the United States. METHODS: By means of an institutional review board-approved protocol, we extracted 107 facility-specific, adult DRS protocols and associated 174 reports from the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission database, representing all laboratories applying for genitourinary scintigraphy certification during the 2016 to 2018 accreditation cycle. From these, we assessed 40 variables regarding facilities and staffing, patient preparation, examination technique and acquisition, image processing, and reporting. RESULTS: Review of protocols and reports demonstrates a very high degree of variability in DRS practice across the United States and suboptimal compliance with societal guidelines and practice parameters. Some of the more variable or underreported parameters include the use of patient hydration, type and dosage of radiopharmaceutical, dosage and timing of diuretic administration, quantitative parameters assessed, and report content. CONCLUSION: There is high variability in the performance and reporting of DRS among laboratories applying for accreditation, similar to that seen in studies of other nuclear medicine examinations. The wide degree of practice variance may have a significant impact on diagnostic accuracy and patient management, with inaccurate or incomplete results. This survey impresses the need for standardization and improved quality of this important nuclear medicine examination.

Meckel's Diverticulum Imaging.

CE credit: For CE credit, you can access the test for this article, as well as additional JNMT CE tests, online at https://www.snmmilearningcenter.org Complete the test online no later than September 2023. Your online test will be scored immediately. You may make 3 attempts to pass the test and must answer 80% of the questions correctly to receive 1.0 CEH (Continuing Education Hour) credit. SNMMI members will have their CEH credit added to their VOICE transcript automatically; nonmembers will be able to print out a CE certificate upon successfully completing the test. The online test is free to SNMMI members; nonmembers must pay $15.00 by credit card when logging onto the website to take the test.

SNMMI Procedure Standard/EANM Guideline for Gated Equilibrium Radionuclide Angiography.

The purpose of this document is to assist nuclear medicine practitioners in recommending, performing, interpreting, and reporting the results of gated equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography (ERNA).

The Importance of Measurement for Quality Improvement: Submaximal Cardiac Stress Testing.

One of the most effective techniques to improve quality is to measure quality. The aim of this article is to defend the importance of quality measurement in nuclear medicine using the long-standing problem of submaximal exercise stress testing. Numerous evidence-based guidelines and research studies establish the importance of maximal stress testing for myocardial perfusion imaging. The 3 cutoffs for adequate cardiac stress that must be met are expenditure of 5 metabolic equivalents of energy, production of symptoms (e.g., fatigue or shortness of breath), and attainment of 85% of the maximum predicted heart rate. Measurement and evaluation of these 3 criteria along with several other metrics can help to validate one aspect of laboratory quality related to myocardial perfusion imaging accuracy.

Snapshot of current carotid artery stenting practice and accreditation in the USA.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this exploratory study was to compare the performance of carotid artery stenting (CAS) best practices between Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) accredited facilities and non-accredited facilities certified by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). METHODS: A random, anonymous survey was sent to CMS and IAC accredited facilities querying facility routine performance of 16 CAS procedure components found in published guidelines and utilised during clinical trials. RESULTS: There were 28 responses (response rate=17%). Significant differences were found between the CMS and the IAC facilities for four of 16 procedure measures: determination of modified Rankin Scale score prior to stenting (p=0.012, 95% CI 20% to 80%), accurate measurement of per cent stenosis using electronic callipers (p=0.005, 95% CI 24% to 84%), confirmation of anticoagulation with activated clotting time greater than 250 s prior to crossing the lesion (p=0.03, 95% CI 7% to 69%), and comparison of facility outcomes to accepted benchmarks for stroke and death (p=0.03, 95% CI 7% to 69%). Overall, IAC facilities performed all 16 procedures more frequently (97%) than CMS facilities (66%) (p<0.001, 95% CI 24% to 36%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the sample size was small, the results demonstrated IAC accredited facilities are more likely to follow best practices, to use quantitative tools to select appropriate patients, and quantitively measure patient-centred clinical outcomes compared with CMS certified facilities. The findings raise the question as to the value of CMS certification versus IAC accreditation as a requirement for reimbursement.