A clinical comparison of MDP and DMAD.
Tc-99m labeled dimethyl-amino-diphosphonate (DMAD) was compared with methylene diphosphonate (MDP) in five healthy volunteers and 28 patients with a variety of bony afflictions. Although the normal bone uptake of DMAD is less than MDP, the lesion-to-normal bone ratio is significantly higher with DMAD. All 71 lesions detected with MDP were also seen with DMAD. However, 10 lesions were disclosed with DMAD that were not seen with MDP. These lesions tended to have low grade concentrations of the radiopharmaceutical and were detected with DMAD by virtue of the lower normal bone uptake rather than higher lesion uptake.
D000328:Adult; D001859:Bone Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000556:secondary; D001842:Bone and Bones / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000556:secondary; D004164:Diphosphonates; D006801:Humans; D007680:Kidney Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000556:secondary; D008875:Middle Aged; D009101:Multiple Myeloma / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D015609:Organotechnetium Compounds; D010001:Osteitis Deformans / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D010019:Osteomyelitis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D011877:Radionuclide Imaging; D013667:Technetium; D013669:Technetium Tc 99m Medronate
D004164:Diphosphonates; D015609:Organotechnetium Compounds; C035780:technetium Tc 99m dimethylaminodiphosphonate; D013667:Technetium; D013669:Technetium Tc 99m Medronate