SNM Annual Meeting Abstracts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     



J Nucl Med. 2008; 49 (Supplement 1):431P
This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by March, M.
Right arrow Articles by Osman, M.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by March, M.
Right arrow Articles by Osman, M.

Technologist Student Abstracts

Technologist Student Papers II

18F-FDG PET/CT for inpatients: Prevalence and challenges

M. March1, C. Botkin1, P. Yost2, N. Nguyen3 and M. Osman3

1 Medcial Imaging and Radiation Therapeutics, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri; 2 PET Imaging, Saint Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri; 3 Nuclear Medicine, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri

2220

Objectives: Despite the added value of PET/CT in oncology, most institutions are reluctant to acquire PET/CT scans for inpatients due to logistical problems and minimal financial compensation compared to outpatient studies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency and logistical challenges in performing inpatient PET/CT studies in our center.

Methods: Retrospectively, we reviewed available data for the 1780 scheduled FDG PET/CT studies acquired at our institution in 2007. A log was kept for all scheduled and performed inpatients cases including recorded information regarding encountered problems. Reasons for same day cancellations were verified and grouped.

Results: Of the 203 scheduled inpatient exams in 2007, 173 (85%) were completed whereas the remaining 30 (15%) were canceled on the same day of the exam. Of the 173 completed studies, cancer diagnoses was known in 143 (83%) and unknown in 20 (17%). Reason for the 30 canceled exams included: high blood glucose level >200 mg/dl in 4 (13.3%), on dextrose in 3 (10%), patient was discharged in 3 (10%), 3(10%) transferred to ICU, 2 (6.6%) taken to surgery, 2 (6.6%) on ventilators, 2 (6.6%) on isolation precautions. Reasons for cancellation were not available for 11/30 (36%) canceled inpatient cases.

Conclusions: Acquiring FDG PET/CT for inpatients is not uncommon in our PET center (173/1780 or 10%); however, performing such studies has inherent logistical challenges requiring patient-tailored solutions. Every effort should be made to improve communications between inpatient units and the PET center in order to minimize cancellation, repeated logistical problems and lost revenues.





This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by March, M.
Right arrow Articles by Osman, M.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by March, M.
Right arrow Articles by Osman, M.