Conclusion
The technologist provides a vital interface between the patient, the clinician, and the nursing and the scientific staff. Information obtained from the patients can be structured to give additional information to the clinicians interpreting the scans if recorded methodically. Technologists are aware of the finer technical aspects of the scans and the procedures that the patients must follow and can both reassure the patients and answer most of their questions. Technologists also must be able to adapt to changing situations when there are failures of tracer production, and the combination of their practical experience and theoretical knowledge means that they are well placed to do this effectively. The interaction with other cross-sectional imaging modalities, particularly in the light of an increasing use of image registration (“fusion”) techniques, further brings together skills from radiographic and nuclear medicine technology backgrounds. This interaction should encourage individuals from varied backgrounds to consider PET as a dynamic, evolving, imaging specialty that has much to offer.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology 1993;189:847–850.
Keyes JR. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995;36:1836–1839.
Barrington SF, Maisey MN. Skeletal muscle uptake of F-18 FDG: effect of oral diazapam. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1127–1129.
Hany TF, Gharehpapagh E, Kamel EM, Buck A, Himms-Hagen J, von Schulthess GK. Brown adipose tissue: a factor to consider in symmetrical tracer uptake in the neck and upper chest region. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29(10):1393–1398.
Kostagoglu L, Wong JCH, Barrington SF, Cronin BF, Dynes AM, Maisey MN. Speech-related visualisation of laryngeal muscles with F-18 FDG. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1771–1773.
Richardson MP, Koepp MJ, Brooks DJ, Fish DR, Duncan JS. Benzodiazepine receptors in focal epilepsy with cortical dysgenesis: a [11C]flumazenil PET study. Ann Neurol 1996;40(2):188–198.
Di Chiro G, De La Paz RL, Brooks RA, Sokoloff L, Kornblith PL, Smith PH, et al. Glucose utilization of cerebral gliomas measured by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and PET. Neurology 1982;32:1323–1329.
Harper PV, Lathrop KA, Krizek H, Lembares N, Stark V, Hoffer PB. Clinical feasibility of myocardial imaging with 13NH3. J Nucl Med 1972;13:278–280.
Phelps ME, Hoffman EJ, Coleman RE, Welch MJ, Raichle ME, Weiss ES, et al. Tomographic images of blood pool and perfusion in brain and heart. J Nucl Med 1976;17:603–612.
Schelbert HR, Phelps ME, Huang S-C, MacDonald NS, Hansen H, Selin C, et al. N-13 ammonia as an indicator of myocardial blood flow. Circulation 1981;63:1259–1272.
Lewis P, Nunan T, Dynes A, Maisey MN. The use of low-dose intravenous insulin in clinical myocardial FDG PET scanning. Clin Nucl Med 1996;21:15–18.
Bacharach SL, Bax JJ, Case J, Delbeke D, Martin WH, Patterson RE. PET myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion imaging with 18FDG, 13NH3 and 82Rb. Part 1: Guidelines for data acquisition and patient preparation. Am J Nucl Cardiol 2003;10(5):543–556.
Schelbert HR, Beanlands R, Bengel F, Knuuti J, DiCarli M, Mahac J, Patterson R. PET myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion imaging with 18FDG, 13NH3 and 82Rb. Part 2: Guidelines for interpretation and reporting. Am J Nucl Cardiol 2003;10(5):557–571.
HMSO. The Ionising Radiations Regulations (1985). Report No. S.I. 1985, No. 1333. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1985.
The Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations. London, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office (UK). Statutory Instrument 2000 No. 1059.
Benatar NA, Cronin BF, OrsDoherty MJ. Radiation dose rates from patients undergoing PET: implications for technologists and waiting areas. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(5):583–589.
Clarke EA, Notghi A, Harding LK. Are MIBI/tetrofosmin heart studies a potential radiation hazard to technologists? Nucl Med Commun 1997;18:574–577.
Clarke EA, Thomson WH, Notghi A, Harding LK. Radiation doses from nuclear medicine patients to an imaging technologist: relation to ICRP recommendations for pregnant workers. Nucl Med Commun 1992;13:795–798.
Bailey DL, Young HE, Bloomfield PM, Meikle SR, Glass DE, Myers MJ, et al. ECAT ART: a continuously rotating PET camera: performance characteristics, comparison with a full ring system, initial clinical studies, and installation considerations in a nuclear medicine department. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24(1):6–15.
Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1966 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against dangers arising from ionising radiation. Official Journal of the European Communities: Report No. L159. Council of the European Union, 1996.
Cronin BF, Marsden PK, O’Doherty MJ. Are restrictions to behaviour of patients required following [18F]-FDG PET studies? Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:121–128.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cronin, B.F. (2006). The Technologist’s Perspective. In: Valk, P.E., Delbeke, D., Bailey, D.L., Townsend, D.W., Maisey, M.N. (eds) Positron Emission Tomography. Springer, London . https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-187-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-187-3_3
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-971-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-187-7
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)