The clinical comparison of skeletal imaging agents
Abstract
99-MTc-methylene diophosphonate from two manufacturers was compared with 99mTc-ethane hydroxy diphosphonate in a randomised trial to assess the relative blood clearances and the subsequent image quality. The 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate preparations were found to be superior with respect to both blood clearance and subjectively assessed image quality, particularly when the interval between injection and scanning was three hours. Bone/soft tissue ratios did not mirror the highly significant qualitative comparisons of image quality.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Benign periarticular, bone and joint lipomatous lesions
- A review of the physiological and histological effects of laser osteotomy
- Quality of bone healing: perspectives and assessment techniques
- Effects of bioactive lipids and lipoproteins on bone
- Bone structure and function
- Quantifying bone structure, micro-architecture, and pathophysiology with MRI.
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.