PET: The Governmental Reimbursement Perspective

  • R. Edward Coleman


The clinical applications of PET have been determined only recently. Reimbursement for clinical PET studies has a major effect on the utilization of PET. The research applications of PET are well documented, but the clinical applications of PET are not as well accepted. Reimbursement for clinical studies is limited to a few specific indications by a small number of private insurance companies at this time. The Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) has referred the review of PET to the Office of Health Technology Assessment (OHTA). HCFA administers Medicare, and thus reimbursement from the Federal Government will be determined by HCFA. HCFA and OHTA have determined that they will not complete their review until the radiopharmaceuticals are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Rubidium-82 is an FDA-approved radiopharmaceutical, but F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) has not been approved by the FDA as yet. Thus, significant uncertainty still is present in the status of reimbursement by the Federal Government.


Positron Emission Tomography Positron Emission Tomography Study Myocardial Viability Solitary Pulmonary Nodule State Board 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R.E. Coleman, M.S. Robbins, and B.A. Siegel, The future of PET in clinical medicine and the impact of drug regulation, Semin Nucl Med. 12:193–201 (1992).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.E. Coleman, W.H. Briner, and B.A. Siegel, Clinical PET scanning: a “shortlived” orphan, Intl J Technol Assess Health Care. 8(4):610–622 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D.E. Kuhl, H.N. Wagner, A. Alavi, R.E. Coleman, S.M. Larson, M.A. Mintun, B.A. Siegel, and P.K. Strudler, Positron emission tomography (PET): clinical status in the United States in 1987, J Nucl Med. 29:1136–1143 (1988).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Al-Aish, R.E. Coleman, S.M. Larson, et al, Advances in clinical imaging using positron emission tomography, National Cancer Institute Workshop Statement, Arch Int Med. 150:735–739 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R.E. Coleman, SPECT and PET in cancer imaging, Cancer. 67:1261–1270 (1991).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    E.F. Patz, V. Lowe, J.M. Hoffman, S. Paine, P. Burrows, R.E. Coleman, and P.C. Goodman, Evaluation of focal pulmonary abnormalities with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose and positron emission tomography, Radiology. 188:487–490 (1993).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.M. Hoffman, M.W. Hanson, and R.E. Coleman, Clinical positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, Radiol Clin N Am. 31:935–960 (1993).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.E. Coleman, Will clinical PET become a reality?, Nucl Med Comm. 14:407–410 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Edward Coleman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations