Venous thrombosis: a controlled study on the performance of scintigraphy with 99Tcm-HMPAO-labelled platelets versus venography

Thrombus Imaging with 99mTc-Hmpao-Labeled Platelets and 111In-Labeled Monoclonal Antifibrin Antibodies

“…Venography showed a greater number of thrombotic veins than Tc-PLT and In-MoAbs. The location of thrombi was in good agreement with the results obtained by venography with both agents, as has also been reported in some previous reports (5,6,14,16).…”

“…Thrombi were visualized at 2 to 4 h after injection with both imaging agents, which agrees well with some previous studies with labeled platelets (6,16) and different monoclo nal antibodies (1,7,10,11). An accurate diagnosis could be obtained as early as 1 to 2 h after injection in patients with thrombosis using monoclonal antifibrin antibodies 59D8 (1, 7), within 60 min by antiplatelet antibody P256 in monkeys (10), and at 2 to 4 h with 99m Tc-labeled T2Gls in dog (8).…”

“…An accurate diagnosis could be obtained as early as 1 to 2 h after injection in patients with thrombosis using monoclonal antifibrin antibodies 59D8 (1, 7), within 60 min by antiplatelet antibody P256 in monkeys (10), and at 2 to 4 h with 99m Tc-labeled T2Gls in dog (8). Tc-PLT has recently been shown to accumulate into thrombi at 2 h post injection (6). Thus, by either one of these two radiopharmaceuticals used in the present study, the diagnosis of DVT can be obtained without delay during the working day.…”

“…Assessing propagation of DVT requires repeated venography. Such limitations of venography have led to the development of several noninvasive radionuclide techniques for diagnosing DVT, including l3, I-fibrinogen uptake test (3,18), '"In-labeled platelets (9), and recently 99m Tc-labeled platelets (6) and 13I I-, '"In-or 99m Tc-labeled antifibrin antibodies (13). We report our clin ical experience comparing 99m Tc-labeled platelets (Tc-PLT) with U1 In-labeled antifibrin antibodies (In-MoAbs) in the detection of DVT of lower extremities in 18 patients with suspicion of thrombosis.…”

Should platelets be labelled in plasma or saline? Consider the clinical indication

“…From a technical point of view, labelling cells in plasma is no more demanding than labelling in saline, and since there is no evidence to suggest that saline is preferable for either cell type, why not simply stay with plasma? For the radiological indications of labelled platelets, the controversy may not be relevant for much longer mainly because technetium-99m hexamethylpropylene amine oxime (99mTc-HMPAO)-labelled platelets, which are generally labelled in plasma, may well turn out to be superior to l~In platelets (Honkanen et al 1991). Furthermore, although they have no haematological indications, radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies (Oster and Sore 1989), either to platelets (Oster et al 1985;Sore etal.…”