Accuracy of Gamma Probes in Localizing Radioactivity: In-Vitro Assessment and Clinical Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radioguided surgery (RGS) uses gamma probes to localize radioactive targets. We examined the in-vitro localizing properties of commercially available gamma probes for three common RGS radioisotopes: technetium-99m (99mTc), indium-111 (111In), and iodine-125 (125I). METHODS: The linear and angular localizing properties of five gamma probes were assessed. Radioactive counts in air were obtained at multiple energy threshold settings for each radioisotope. The full width half maximum (FWHM) and angular half maximum (AHM) were calculated to determine localizing accuracy. RESULTS: The FWHM of the five probes ranged from 1.2 to 3.4 cm for 99mTc, 1.8 to 2.7 cm for 111In and 1.6 to 2.8 cm for 125I. AHM of the probes ranged from 20 to 49 degrees for 99mTc, 14 to 35 degrees for 111In, and 18 to 47 degrees for 125I. The ranking of probe accuracy depended on the radioisotope studied. Absolute count rates varied with energy threshold settings for each probe and radioisotope. Probes required individualized energy threshold settings for optimal performance. CONCLUSIONS: The five probes varied in their characteristics for localizing the three radioisotopes. Each probe has particular detection characteristics that may change with different radioisotopes. Differences in radioisotope detection may explain intraoperative variation in localization during lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node dissection (LM/SL). Surgeons should be aware of probe performance characteristics before intraoperative use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".