TY - JOUR T1 - A Rapid Radiochemical Purity Testing Method for <sup>99m</sup>Tc-Tetrofosmin JF - Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology JO - J. Nucl. Med. Technol. SP - 81 LP - 84 DO - 10.2967/jnmt.109.070573 VL - 38 IS - 2 AU - Laura A. Eggert AU - Michael D. Dick AU - Douglas W. Mahoney AU - Joseph P. Olson AU - Gregory L. Werner AU - Joseph C. Hung Y1 - 2010/06/01 UR - http://tech.snmjournals.org/content/38/2/81.abstract N2 - The standard radiochemical purity (RCP) testing method for 99mTc-tetrofosmin as described in the package insert requires extensive time (20–30 min) and considerable skill to achieve accurate results. Additionally, the instant thin-layer chromatography strip impregnated with silica gel (2×20 cm) used in the standard method will not be commercially available in the future. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a method developed by our laboratory for RCP testing of 99mTc-sestamibi could also be used as an alternative method for the RCP assay of 99mTc-tetrofosmin. Methods: The alternative RCP testing system consisted of a precut paper strip (1×8.5 cm) from solvent saturation pads (Pall Corp.) as the stationary phase, with 1:1 chloroform:tetrahydrofuran used as the mobile phase. To validate the reliability of the alternative method, RCP values from 17 kit preparations were compared with the 2 methods. Kits were reconstituted according to the package insert instructions, and 4 additions of 99mTc-sodium pertechnetate were purposely added to create trials with RCP values below the accepted limit of 90% purity. Results: Two hundred four trials (100 of which were replicated) were run from the 17 kit preparations. Sixty-four (31%) of the 204 trials were below 90% purity based on the standard method. The overall agreement between the standard and alternative methods was 94% (192/204). The sensitivity of the alternative method for unacceptable RCP limits was 86% (55/64), and the specificity for acceptable RCP values was 98% (137/140). The agreement between the replicated trials of the alternative method was 99% (99/100), and for the standard method it was 92% (92/100). Conclusion: The standard method proved to be a much slower method and requires much more precision and attention. The alternative method is much faster, is easier, requires less attention to the solvent-development process, and can be used for RCP testing of both 99mTc-tetrofosmin and 99mTc-sestamibi. Furthermore, the stationary phase is much more readily available, is not moisture-sensitive, and is less susceptible to operator technique. Our method is accurate in determining the RCP value of 99mTc-tetrofosmin and is a better RCP testing method for 99mTc-tetrofosmin. ER -