论文部分内容阅读
本研究的目的是评价用盖革-弥勒(GM)探头体外监测法代替尿样分析法测定甲状腺肿瘤病人体内~(131)I滞留量的适用性。并对比用Comp(做了能量补偿措施的)探头和Uncomp(未做能量补偿措施的)探头进行这种测量的相对精确度。对服用了2.44~7.70GBq(66~208mCi)~(131)I的17名甲状腺肿瘤病人,用尿样分析法、Comp GM探头体外测量法和Uncomp GM探头体外测量法分别测其体内~(131)I的滞留量。结果:用三种方法测定的体内~(131)I滞留量的相对关系符合下列函数:“尿”=0.0287+0.961“Comp探头测定值”,r~2=0.812;“尿”=0.175+0.672“Uncomp探头测定值”,r~2=0.747。式中,“尿”、“Comp探头测定值”和“Uncomp探头测定值”分别表示三种测量方法测定的体内~(131)I的滞留量(GBq)。数据表明,Comp探头测定值和Uncomp探头测定值必须分别低于740MBq(20mCi)和592MBq(16mCi),才能以95%可信限确保体内的~(131)I滞留量相
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the applicability of the GM-Probe in vitro method for the determination of 131I retention in patients with thyroid tumors instead of urine samples. Compare the relative accuracy of this measurement with Comp (energy-compensated) and Uncomp (non-energy-compensated) probes. Seventeen patients with thyroid tumors who took 2.44 ~ 7.70GBq (66 ~ 208mCi) ~ (131) I were measured with urine sample analysis method, Comp GM probe in vitro method and Uncomp GM probe in vitro measurement method. I retention. Results: The relative in vivo 131I retention values determined by the three methods fit the following functions: “Urine” = 0.0287 + 0.961 “Measured Probe”, r ~ 2 = 0.812; Urine = 0.175 + 0.672 “Uncomp probe measured value”, r ~ 2 = 0.747. In the formula, “urine”, “Comp probe measured value” and “Uncomp probe measured value” respectively represent the in vivo 131I retention (GBq) measured by the three measurement methods. The data show that both the Comp probe and the Uncomp probe must be below 740 MBq (20 mCi) and 592 MBq (16 mCi), respectively, in order to ensure a ~ (131) I hold in the body with a 95% confidence limit