RESUMO
Radiolabeled red blood cell (RBC) scintigraphy is a common study to detect and localize gastrointestinal hemorrhage. There are many potential entities that may result in false-positive RBC scintigraphy. Here, we present a case of enlarged feeding vessels of omental carcinomatosis which scintigraphically might be mistaken as intraluminal bowel activity and thus active hemorrhage. This case highlights the importance of reviewing correlative imaging in patients with a large neoplastic burden.
RESUMO
Peer review is routine among physicians, nurses, and pharmacy staff yet is uncommon in the field of nuclear medicine technology. Although not a requirement of regulatory agencies, nuclear medicine technical peer review can greatly enhance the quality of patient care in both hospital and outpatient settings. To date, detailed methods for accomplishing this task have not been published. Methods: 19,688 nuclear medicine studies performed at a single institution over a 5-y period were critically reviewed. Major findings (errors with potential to change physician interpretation of the study or resulting in prescription error) and minor findings (errors without an adverse effect on study outcome or interpretation) were identified and tabulated monthly according to finding type, study type, and individual staff member. Results: The technical peer review method used at our institution provided a comprehensive means to measure the rate and types of errors. Over time, this system tracked the performance of nuclear medicine staff and students, providing feedback that led to a measurable reduction in errors. Conclusion: We present a technical peer review system based on our own experience that can be adapted by other nuclear medicine facilities to fit their needs.
