Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-09.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Technetium-99m hand perfusion scintigraphy (Raynaud’s scan) as a method of verification in hand arm vibration syndrome: a review
Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Ann Occup Environ Med : Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search
Advanced Search
mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Ann Occup Environ Med > Volume 34; 2022 > Article
Review Technetium-99m hand perfusion scintigraphy (Raynaud’s scan) as a method of verification in hand arm vibration syndrome: a review
Taewoong Ha1orcid, Hyeoncheol Oh1orcid, Jungwon Kim1,2orcid
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2022;34:e26.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.35371/aoem.2022.34.e26
Published online: October 11, 2022

1Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan, Korea.

2Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kosin University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea.

Correspondence: Jungwon Kim. Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Kosin University College of Medicine, 262 Gamcheon-ro, Seo-gu, Busan 49267, Korea. hedoc68@gmail.com
• Received: April 14, 2022   • Revised: July 10, 2022   • Accepted: September 11, 2022

Copyright © 2022 Korean Society of Occupational & Environmental Medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 95 Views
  • 1 Download
  • 1 Crossref
  • 1 Scopus
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • It is important to assess the blood flow of fingers in the verification of hand-arm vibration syndrome. In the Republic of Korea, most assessments of the blood flow in the fingers are performed using a cold provocation test with finger skin color change. However, this test is a non-objective method with a relatively low sensitivity, leading to possible social and legal problems. Thus, we reviewed the characteristics of several tests that assess the blood flow in the fingers. Among these tests, using the radioactive isotope method, Raynaud’s scan has a relatively higher sensitivity and specificity than other tests, provides objective results, and is approachable in many hospitals. So we suggest using Raynaud's scan as an alternative test when cold provocation test with finger skin color change is negative in vibration exposed worker.
  • Keywords: Raynaud disease; Hand-arm vibration syndrome; Cold temperature; Radionuclide imaging
Raynaud’s phenomenon is a symptom of color change in the finger skin due to decreased digital blood flow. Primary Raynaud’s phenomenon refers to the absence of an underlying pathological cause, whereas secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon includes pathological causes such as rheumatoid, hematological, autoimmune, and vascular diseases. The known causes of Raynaud’s phenomenon include large vessel, occupational, autoimmune rheumatic, drug/chemical-related, and vaso-occlusive diseases.1 The prevalence of Raynaud’s phenomenon was shown to be 3.8%,2 9.6% (for women), 5.8% (for men),3 and 3.5% (4.3% [for women], 2.7% [for men])4 in the United States, respectively.
Occupational vibration exposure affects the skin, blood vessels, and nerves of the extremities, leading to symptoms known as hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Vascular symptoms mainly appear as cold-induced spasms of fingers vessels and are called vibration white fingers (VWFs).5 VWF has a prevalence of 53% among workers who use pneumatic chipping and grinding tools in foundries and shipyards in the United States,6 21.7% among forestry workers who use brush saws and chain saws and stone workers who use rotary and percussive tools for marble processing (the median duration of daily exposure was 126 minutes),7 and 15.4% among grinding workers who use belt grinding machines in sports equipment factory in China (the mean exposure duration was 6.9 ± 1.4 hours).8 The Republic of Korea (ROK) conducts medical examination for workers exposed to vibration. According to a report by the Ministry of Employment and Labor in 2021, 10,925 workplaces had vibration work and 167,062 people were exposed to vibration work. Among them, 276 patients had possible occupational diseases and 10 patients had probable occupational diseases.9 The prevalence in ROK was lower than the prevalence studies among other countries. This is thought to be partially because, while the ROK’s medical examination for workers exposed to vibration evaluates peripheral circulation, nerve function, and motor function without cold provocation in the first examination, other papers evaluated by cold provocation test or past VWF history. In addition, there are differences in the study subjects such as exposure level.
Methods for assessing decreased finger blood flow include cold and vibration provocation tests with finger color change, finger skin temperature, finger systolic pressure, finger arterial inflow, and finger blood flow using Doppler or radioactive isotopes.10 There is no reproducible “gold standard” diagnostic test for Raynaud’s phenomenon (RP) yet,11 so most of articles set their own gold standard for anamnestic diagnosis based on the patient’s RP history. But anamnestic diagnosis is not a true method of reference under all circumstance. Anamnestically non-symptomatic RP in vibration-exposed worker with or without a positive history of RP can be exist. This implies that the specificity of objective test is probably higher than estimated with the interview as a reference.12
Guidelines on Raynaud’s syndrome have been prepared in the ROK13; however, current standardized diagnosis criteria are still lacking. In ROK, in order to receive compensation for Raynaud’s syndrome according to the guidelines on Raynaud’s syndrome of Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, it is necessary to take a photo of Raynaud’s phenomenon. Other tests such as Raynaud’s scan, skin temperature test, finger blood pressure test, and nail pressure test should also be performed if necessary.13 Among those who have actual symptoms and want compensation for Raynaud’s syndrome, the symptoms were not reproduced in the cold provocation test, so the diagnosis of Raynaud’s syndrome was not confirmed. In this case, there was a limitation in determining whether to compensate only by taking pictures. Since only the cold provocation test with finger skin color change is fixed as an essential test, most of the work-relatedness assessments in many cases use only the cold provocation test with finger skin color change as a diagnostic indicator. Among the work-relatedness assessments (23 cases) related to Raynaud’s syndrome conducted by the Korea Labor and Welfare Service from January to June 2016, 19 patients underwent the cold provocation test with finger skin color change only, and three patients underwent the cold provocation test with finger skin color change and Raynaud’s scan test.14 A cold provocation test with finger skin color change and nail compression test were performed in one patient. The approval rate conducted by the Korea Labor and Welfare Service that performed only the cold provocation test with finger skin color change was 34.8%, and the approval rate was 66.7% when the cold provocation test with finger skin color change and Raynaud’s scan were combined.14
We reviewed precedents related to HAVS. In some cases, the cold provocation test with finger skin color change was performed only in the work-relatedness assessment, which resulted in no finger skin color change. Therefore, they were not approved of work relatedness and applied for the trial. Subsequently, the decrease in blood flow in the finger was confirmed using Raynaud’s scan during the trial. Raynaud’s scan helped diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon by discriminate false-negative result from the cold provocation test with finger skin color change. The court reversed the previous decision resulted from no finger skin color change in the cold provocation test with finger skin color change.15,16 Other judgment decided that the cold provocation test with finger skin color change had limitations in reproducibility and sensitivity, and that Raynaud’s Scan was the most helpful in verifying Raynaud’s phenomenon.17
This study aimed to review the characteristics of the cold provocation test with finger skin color change and other tests related to HAVS. And we aimed for findings a recommendation for an objective test that presents consistently high sensitivity as a diagnostic tool, satisfying the social requirements for compensation for HAVS.
We reviewed studies related to Raynaud’s phenomenon, HAVS, and VWFs. Our main focus was the methods used to diagnose Raynaud’s phenomenon. The characteristics, sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic method were evaluated and compared. Searches were conducted using the EMBASE and Medline data bases.
The following were the search terms used: “hand arm vibration syndrome” OR “vibration white finger” OR “Raynaud’s phenomenon” And “cold provocation test” OR “hand chilling test” And “sensitivity” OR “specificity.” All articles published up to 20 February 2022 were searched. We included studies that satisfied the following criteria: 1) articles on the diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon and 2) articles presenting sensitivity and specificity. All relevant published articles were included regardless of published date. Even if the entire original text cannot be reviewed, studies suggesting the research method, sensitivity, and specificity in the abstract or other review articles have also been added. If the study was about Raynaud’s scan, only the test method was extracted, regardless if the sensitivity or specificity was not presented.
Cold provocation test with finger skin color change
A cold provocation test with finger skin color change assessed for color change in fingers after immersing both hands in cold water. The cold provocation varied with the temperature of the cold water being 10°C–16°C, with a cold provocation time of 5–20 minutes. After cold provocation, a finger color change was observed for at least 10 minutes.13
Sensitivity (25%–100%) and specificity (93%–100%) varied from study to study (Table 1), but the sensitivity was relatively low whereas the specificity was relatively high. In one study, the kappa coefficient was 0.38 in tests performed on the same day with a time difference of at least 2 hours in the same subjects.12 When the test was repeated with a time difference of more than 2 hours, there were cases where subject who showed a positive result in one test and subsequently showed negative result a follow-up test.18 Because the color change of the finger is judged by the subjective eyes of each doctor, subjective judgment occurs when the color change is unclear. In addition, one study suggested that this test has low sensitivity; thus, even if a negative result is obtained, diagnosis cannot be ruled out.12 In some studies, body chilling or metal cylinder squeezing was accompanied during cold provocation. Another study used a smartphone-monitoring application. This monitoring application prompted subjects to take pictures of their hands during Raynaud’s phenomenon, and the researchers then subsequently analyzed the pictures.24 Poole et al.25 recommended that use photographs during the attack of blanching for the classification of HAVS. If the most severe attack is not captured, scoring is pending. They also opposed to routine angiography.
Table 1

Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger skin color change

Authors Publication year Chilling temperature (°C) Chilling time (min) Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)
Olsen19 (by visual) 1988 10 5 57 93
(by slide) 61 91
Pyykkö et al.18 1986 12–15 10 25 95
Pyykkö et al.20 1982 15 15 45
Hellstrom and Myhre21 1971 13–16 20 100 100
Kylin22 1968 15 10 50
Agate23 1949 15 15 68
Cold provocation test with finger systolic pressure
A cold provocation test with finger systolic blood pressure can be performed one finger at a time; therefore, the operator must select the target finger to be tested. The target finger was equipped with a tourniquet cuff to blocking blood flow during cold provocation in the proximal phalanx, a cuff for cooling and blood pressure measurement in the middle phalanx, and a photoplethysmography device for checking blood flow in the distal phalanx. The target finger is cooled locally by circulating cold water in the cuff of the middle phalanx, while the tourniquet cuff of the proximal phalanx blocks blood flow to the target finger. After cooling, the tourniquet cuff was released, the pressure of the blood pressure cuff was gradually lowered, and the blood pressure at the moment when blood flow was confirmed on the photoplethysmography device of the distal phalanx was recorded. The ratio (finger systolic pressure% [FSP%]) of the systolic blood pressure (with cooling) of the target finger and the systolic blood pressure (without cooling) of the other finger is calculated.26
The lower normal limit of FSP% varied from 0% to 89%. In several studies, body chilling was accompanied during cold provocation. The sensitivity was 70%–100% and the specificity was 58%–100% (Table 2). In one study, the participants performed a psychological challenge during the cooling, but there was no statistically significant difference.28
Table 2

Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger systolic pressure

Authors Publication year Chilling temperature (°C) Chilling time (min) Detection limit of finger systolic pressure (%) Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)
Ye and Griffin26 2016 15 5 < 80 97 95
Bovenzi27 2002 10 5 < 60 87 94
Jennings et al.28 1999 10 5 0 79 88
Bovenzi29 1998 10 5 < 60 85.8 93.7
Olsen30 1998 15, 10, 6 5 0 86 100
Bovenzi31 1993 15, 10 5 < 60 84.2 97.8
Allen et al.32 1992 15, 10 5 0 81 88
Virokannas et al.33 1991 15, 10 5 < 76 50 84
Kurozawa et al.34 1991 10 5 < 90 81.7 90.3
Bovenzi35 1988 10 5 < 60 87.1 100
Olsen19 1988 15, 6 5 < 58 96 64
Bovenzi36 1987 5 5 < 60 100 89
Ekenvall and Lindblad37 1986 10 < 60 74
Pyykkö et al.18 1986 5 5 25 95
Olsen et al.38 1982 15, 6 5 0 92 81
Olsen and Nielsen39 1979 15, 6 5 0 92 100
Cold provocation test with finger skin temperature
Finger skin temperature can be measured in two ways. One is to attach a temperature sensor (thermocouple or thermistor) to the target point, and the other is to use an infrared camera for thermal imaging.
The detection parameters used in the test were varied, including the rewarmed skin temperature after cooling, times for fingers to rewarm, and rewarming rate after cooling. The sensitivity was 14%–100%, and the specificity was 37%–100% (Table 3). Another previous study also derived the temperature difference between the center of the palm and the fingers (or the temperature difference between the center of sole and the big toe) as a detection parameter without any cooling required.52
Table 3

Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger skin temperature

Authors Publication year Chilling temperature (°C) Chilling time (min) Detection parameter Thermometer type Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)
Xiao et al.40 2019 10 10 T5min–T0min Infra-red thermal image camera 76.7 70
Mirbod and Sugiura41 2017 5 1 T5min Thermistor 90 86
Ye and Griffin26 2016 15 5 t4°C Thermocouple 77 79
Mahbub et al.42 2011 10 5 T5min Thermistor 70 70
Poole et al.43 2006 15 5 Difference between T6min of tip and T6min of middle portion Thermocouple + Infra-red thermal image camera 57.6 85.7
Poole et al.44 2004 15 5 t4°C Thermocouple 70.8 77.3
Mason et al.45 2003 15 5 t4°C Thermocouple 65.8 58.5
Coughlin et al.46 2001 5 1 T7min Infra-red thermal image camera 100 88
Bogadi-Šare and Zavalić47 1994 10 10 Recovery rate of finger skin temperature Thermocouple 69 72
Harada48 1987 10 10 T10min 22.4 98
Bovenzi36 1987 5 5 Recovery rate of finger skin temperature 60 92
Laroche and Theriault49 1987 Digital temperature recovery time 49.1 71.4
Pelmear et al.50 1987 10 10 t50% Thermocouple 39 84
Kurumatani et al.51 1986 10 10 T5min Thermistor 91.1 73.3
aTχmin: finger skin temperature after immersion χmin; btχºC: times for fingers to rewarm by χºC; ctχ%: times for recovery for χ%.
Perfusion scintigraphy using radioactive isotopes (Raynaud’s scan)
In most perfusion scintigraphy using radioactive isotopes, the one-hand chilling method is often preferred. Among both hands, the more symptomatic hand is cooled for a certain period of time and given a recovery time, before injecting the radioactive isotopes. After the injection, static and dynamic images were acquired using a gamma camera. Subsequently, a region of interest (ROI) is drawn from the obtained image for quantitative calculation.53 The ROI is often manually drawn by dividing the area of the four fingers (excluding the thumb) and the palm. There have been studies with and without cold provocation, and the cold provocation method was also varied. The radioactive isotopes used were technetium-99m bound with various ligands, such as Technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate, Technetium-99m red blood cell, Technetium-99m hydroxymethylene diphosphonate, Technetium-99m pertechnetate. For the detection parameters, the finger-to-palm ratio calculated from the blood flow of the two ROIs, initial slope in the time-count graph, and first peak height of the count were used (Table 4).
Table 4

Characteristics of Raynaud’s scan

Authors Publication year Chilling type Chilling temperature (°C) Chilling time (min) Region of interest Technetium type Detection parameter Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)
Lee et al.53 2012 One-hand 4 2 Fingers region, palm region Tc-99m MDP Initial slope ratio 87 88
Kwon et al.54 2009 One-hand 4 0.5 Fingers region Tc-99m HDP Initial slope ratio 91.2 93.3
Sarikaya et al.55 2004 One-hand Iced water 0.5 Whole hand Tc-99m sestamibi Decrease of perfusion 100 70
Pavlov-Dolijanovic et al.56 2016 Non Fingers region, palm region Tc-99m pertechnetate Finger to palm ratio 79 70
Pavlov-Dolijanovic et al.57 2015 Non Tc-99m pertechnetate Finger to palm ratio 72 74
Lee et al.58 2017 One-hand Ratios of the first peak height, Blood pool uptake
Chong et al.59 2013 One-hand 4 1 Fingers region, palm region Tc-99m RBC Finger to palm ratio
Csiki et al.60 2006 Non Fingers region, palm region Tc-99m DTPA Finger to palm ratio
Galuska et al.61 2000 Non Fingers region, palm region Tc-99m DTPA Finger to palm ratio
Bang et al.62 1992 One-hand 4 0.5 Fingers region Tc-99m MDP Cumulative digital blood flow ratio, Initial slope ratio
Kunnen et al.63 1988 Both-hand Iced water Until tuned pale and/or pain noted Tc-99m pertechnetate Radioactivity ratio of Peak level and plateau level
In one study, perfusion scintigraphy was performed by dividing the participants into the one-hand chilling group and the non-chilling group, and this study showed that the one-hand chilling method had higher sensitivity and specificity.53 In only one study, a both-hand chilling method was performed.63 In a case report, to test both hands, the left hand was tested first, and after 1 week, the right hand was tested.59 In another study, first peak height and initial slope were lower in HAVS-related occupational Raynaud’s phenomenon than in primary Raynaud’s phenomenon. These findings suggest the possibility of using Raynaud’s scan as a differential test between primary Raynaud’s phenomenon and HAVS-related occupational Raynaud’s phenomenon.58
Comparison of tests
The median of sensitivity and specificity of the tests were calculated. The advantages and disadvantages of these tests are presented in Table 5.
Table 5

Comparison between tests

Test Advantage Disadvantage Median of sensitivity (range) Median of specificity (range)
Cold provocation, Finger skin color test Low cost, easy to test, high specificity Non-objective results, low sensitivity 57 (25–100) 94 (91–100)
Cold provocation, Finger systolic pressure test Standardized method, low pain (due to local cooling), high sensitivity, high specificity Need new equipment and operator, test only one finger at once 85.9 (25–100) 93.7 (64–100)
Cold provocation, Finger skin temperature test Easy to test Low sensitivity 69.5 (22.4–100) 78.2 (58.5–98)
Raynaud's Scan (one-hand chilling method) Ready to use equipment, operator, specialist in many hospitals, high sensitivity, high specificity Expensive equipment 91.2 (87–100) 88 (70–93.3)
Raynaud's Scan (non-chilling method) Ready to use equipment, operator, specialist in many hospitals Expensive equipment, low sensitivity, low specificity 75.5 (72–79) 72 (70–74)
The main cause of HAVS is local vibration, and the main frequency that causes damage is between 25 and 320 Hz. The pathogenesis of HAVS is complex and not fully understood.5 Its vascular symptoms are caused by an imbalance between vasoconstriction and vasodilatation. This imbalance leads to the predominance of vasoconstriction due to arterial smooth muscle hypertrophy, periarterial fibrosis, and damage of endothelial cells and receptors.64 The main pathological findings in HAVS are i) muscular layer of the artery wall thickening with muscle cell hypertrophy, ii) peripheral demyelinating neuropathy with increased numbers of Schwann cells and fibroblasts, and iii) increased amounts of connective tissue that causes perivascular and perineural fibrosis.65 Furthermore, these changes become more severe as the vibration exposure increases.66
The diagnosis of HAVS is difficult because it is possible only after identifying related symptoms, occupational vibration exposure, and other causes of secondary Raynaud’s syndrome. Decreased blood flow in the fingers of patients with vibration exposure, while other causes of secondary Raynaud’s syndrome have not been identified, is key to HAVS verification and compensation. Work-relatedness assessment and compensation are related to social and legal issues beyond medical judgment.67 Thus, in the work-relatedness assessment of HAVS, there is a social demand for objective verification. However, there is no gold-standard test for this purpose currently. Therefore, we compared tests that could assess the decrease in finger blood flow among patients with suspected HAVS.
The cold provocation test with finger skin color change has relatively low costs, ease of testing, and high specificity. Therefore, this can be suggested as a first test for HAVS in a clinical setting. Because of its high specificity, it is helpful in diagnosing HAVS if color changes are observed during the test. However, if the finger color change is not checked or remains unclear, an additional objective examination is necessary, considering the low sensitivity and nonobjective characteristics of the cold provocation test with finger skin color change. In addition, the use of imaging diagnostic criteria for case definition in the diagnosis and compensation of occupational musculoskeletal disorders provides higher quality than using only physical examinations.68
The nail pressure test (Lewis-Prusik test) is also used to evaluate HAVS. But this test is poorly standardized and the result unlikely to be helpful unless it is grossly abnormal.69 Also, considering that the tester judges the return to normal color, it’s results considered to be subjective like skin color change test.
The advantage of the cold provocation test with finger systolic blood pressure is that it uses a standardized test method, and the patients experience minimal pain as a result of local cooling.12 It also has relatively high sensitivity and specificity (Table 5). However, many hospitals do not have testing equipment (finger cuff, finger blood pressure gauge, finger photoplethysmograph, and recorder works with blood pressure gauge and photoplethysmograph); therefore, new expensive equipment and operators are required.12 Additionally, only one finger can be tested simultaneously. Thus, to assess the work-relatedness of HAVS, the test needs to be repeated when information about another fingers or other hand is required.
The advantage of the cold provocation test with finger skin temperature is that it can test all fingers simultaneously, and the test method is easy.12 Although it provides objective results, it has a low sensitivity similar to that of the cold provocation test with finger skin color change (Table 5). Therefore, in cases where the skin color test was negative, cold provocation test with finger skin temperature was not suitable as an additional test. Proud et al. concluded that Cold provocation test with measurement of digital rewarming times was no value in evaluating the presence or severity of HAVS.70
Perfusion scintigraphy using radioactive isotopes (Raynaud’s scan) with one-hand chilling had the highest sensitivity and relatively high specificity (Table 5). However, the gamma camera used in this test is expensive. Nonetheless, in many hospitals that provide nuclear medicine tests (diagnostic imaging of the thyroid, salivary gland, urinary bladder, vesicoureteral reflux, and nasolacrimal drainage, Meckel’s diverticulum, bone, cardiac perfusion imaging, cerebral perfusion imaging used to localize the area of stroke), operators and specialists, and gamma camera are already prepared, allowing Raynaud’s scan to be performed easily in simple settings.62 Currently, there are 303 gamma cameras in ROK in 201971 and 331 in 2021.72 Considering that there are 356 general hospitals in ROK (in 2019),73 almost all general hospitals can use gamma cameras.
In secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon with unilateral attack, abnormalities in peripheral vessels, trauma, embolism, or work-related secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon may be suspected.74 Authors found two cases of unilateral Raynaud’s phenomenon caused by vibration injury of digital vessels.75 In one study conducted in the ROK, 69.1% of patients had more severe symptoms in the right hand. Considering the left-handedness rate (5.8%) of the ROK, the study suggested the possibility of an association between the right-handed rate and the severity of symptoms was relatively low. They also suggested the possibility of an association between the severity of symptoms and the method of using vibration tools (vibration exposure history).76 Therefore, in the work-relatedness assessment of HAVS, it is necessary to evaluate the vibration exposure history (duration, intensity of vibration, which hand is mostly used, type of tools) and the severity of symptoms in both hands.
Raynaud scan has highest median of sensitivity with hand-chilling, but median of sensitivity decreased without the hand-chilling (Table 5). Considering this, hand-chilling is essential when performing Raynaud scan. Most of the reviewed studies used Raynaud’s scan with one-hand chilling method (Table 5). This is because the secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon is often due to systemic causes such as rheumatoid, hematological, and autoimmune factors; therefore, diagnosis can be made only by decreased blood flow on one hand.53 However, in the case of HAVS, the history of vibration exposure in both hands may differ depending on the method of using the vibrating tools. Therefore, it is necessary to match the decrease of blood flow in both hands with the history of vibration exposure. To compare both hands, authors recommend Raynaud’s scan with both-hand chilling. In Raynaud’s scan with both-hand chilling, Raynaud’s scan with non-chilling is done first, followed by Raynaud’s scan with both-hand chilling. By comparing these two results, the decrease of blood flow in both hands can be assessed. By considering objective results of Raynaud’s scan and vibration history, the verification of the HAVS will provide additional clinical, social and economic benefits.
In ROK, authors confirmed that the approval rate of compensation by Korea Labor Welfare Corporation was higher in the case that cold provocation test with finger skin color change and Raynaud’s scan than in the case that performed only the cold provocation test with finger skin color change.14 Authors think this is related to the high sensitivity and objective results of Raynaud’s scan. However, in most work-relatedness assessments, only the cold provocation test with finger skin color change was conducted.14 In many cases where work-relatedness assessment ends with negative result in the cold provocation test with finger skin color change, a trial is carried out.15,16 The inconvenience of the subject, time loss, and social costs occur during this process. Therefore, if a vibration-exposed worker has symptoms of HAVS and results of the cold provocation test with finger skin color change is negative, an additional Raynaud’s scan should be performed to objectively assess the decrease of blood flow in both hands. Accurate diagnosis by Raynaud’s scan is essential part to decide work-relatedness of the disease.
In the studies that performed Raynaud’s scan, the detection parameters, radioactive isotopes, chilling time were different with no standard protocols which is adopted internationally and the number of articles was small. Therefore, additional research on Raynaud scan to unify protocols and more numbers of article is needed.
In this situation, more data are required to use Raynaud scan for compensation of work related disease. However, it is true that it shows that there are advantages than other methods.
Various diagnostic methods have been proposed to verify Raynaud’s phenomenon in HAVS, but an appropriate and objective gold standard test has not been established due to low test sensitivity, high test costs, and side complications. Raynaud’s scan is a test to verify Raynaud’s phenomenon in HAVS and it has relatively higher sensitivity and specificity than other tests, provides objective results, and is approachable in many hospitals. So we suggest using Raynaud’s scan as an alternative test when cold provocation test with finger skin color change is negative in vibration exposed worker.

Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions:

  • Conceptualization: Ha TW, Oh HC, Kim JW.

  • Data curation: Ha TW, Oh HC.

  • Investigation: Ha TW, Kim JW.

  • Writing - original draft: Ha TW.

  • Writing - review & editing: Oh HC, Kim JW.

  • 1. Pauling JD, Hughes M, Pope JE. Raynaud’s phenomenon-an update on diagnosis, classification and management. Clin Rheumatol 2019;38(12):3317–3330. 31420815.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 2. Gelber AC, Wigley FM, Stallings RY, Bone LR, Barker AV, Baylor I, et al. Symptoms of Raynaud’s phenomenon in an inner-city African-American community: prevalence and self-reported cardiovascular comorbidity. J Clin Epidemiol 1999;52(5):441–446. 10360339.PubMed
  • 3. Fraenkel L, Zhang Y, Chaisson CE, Maricq HR, Evans SR, Brand F, et al. Different factors influencing the expression of Raynaud’s phenomenon in men and women. Arthritis Rheum 1999;42(2):306–310. 10025925.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Weinrich MC, Maricq HR, Keil JE, McGregor AR, Diat F. Prevalence of Raynaud phenomenon in the adult population of South Carolina. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43(12):1343–1349. 2254771.ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Heaver C, Goonetilleke KS, Ferguson H, Shiralkar S. Hand-arm vibration syndrome: a common occupational hazard in industrialized countries. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2011;36(5):354–363. 21310765.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 6. Wasserman D, Taylor W, Behrens V, Samueloff S, Reynolds D. Vibration White Finger Disease in U.S. Workers Using Pneumatic Chipping and Grinding Hand Tools. Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 1982, 82–118.
  • 7. Bovenzi M. A longitudinal study of vibration white finger, cold response of digital arteries, and measures of daily vibration exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2010;83(3):259–272. 19730875.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 8. Wei N, Lin H, Chen T, Xiao B, Yan M, Lang L, et al. The hand-arm vibration syndrome associated with the grinding of handheld workpieces in a subtropical environment. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2021;94(4):773–781. 33420830.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 9. Ministry of Employment and Labor. Result of Medical Examinations of Workers, 2020: Government Publications Registration Number (GPRN):11-1492000-000029-10. Sejong, Korea: Occupational Safety and Health Policy Bureau, Occupational Health Standard Division; 2021.
  • 10. Chetter IC, Kent PJ, Kester RC. The hand arm vibration syndrome: a review. Cardiovasc Surg 1998;6(1):1–9.Article
  • 11. Maldonado G, Ríos C. Raynaud’s phenomenon associated with nitric acid: case report. Revista Colombiana de Reumatología 2017;24(1):48–53.Article
  • 12. Olsen N. Diagnostic aspects of vibration-induced white finger. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2002;75(1-2):6–13. 11898878.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 13. Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service. Guidelines on Raynaud’s Syndrome: Guideline No. 2015-41. Ulsan, Korea: Korea Workers’ Compensation & Welfare Service; 2015.
  • 14. Kim H. [Workers’ Compensation and Welfare Corporation guidelines make workers cry] Raynaud’s syndrome <Vibration white finger, Vibration neuropathy> Industrial accident approval rate ‘dropped’ due to guidelines. Labortoday. Updated 2016]. Accessed March 20, 2022]. https://www.labortoday.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=140570 .
  • 15. Seoul High Court. Conviction 2018Nu30411 Judgment. Seoul, Korea: Administration of Seoul High Court; 2018.
  • 16. Seoul Administrative Court. Conviction 2019GuDan53467 Judgment. Seoul, Korea: Administration of Seoul High Court; 2020.
  • 17. Seoul High Court. Conviction 2016Nu66195 Judgment. Seoul, Korea: Administration of Seoul High Court; 2017.
  • 18. Pyykkö I, Färkkilä M, Korhonen O, Starck J, Jäntti V. Cold provocation tests in the evaluation of vibration-induced white finger. Scand J Work Environ Health 1986;12(4 Spec No):254–258. 3775310.ArticlePubMed
  • 19. Olsen N. Diagnostic tests in Raynaud’s phenomena in workers exposed to vibration: a comparative study. Br J Ind Med 1988;45(6):426–430. 3395577.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 20. Pyykko I, Korhonen O, Farkkila M, Starck J, Aatola S. A longitudinal study of the vibration syndrome in Finnish forestry workers. In: Brammer AJ, Taylor W, editors. Vibration Effects on the Hand and Arm in Industry. 1982, 157–167.
  • 21. Hellstrom B, Myhre K. A comparison of some methods of diagnosing Raynaud phenomena of occupational origin. Br J Ind Med 1971;28(3):272–279. 5571261.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 22. Kylin B. Hälso-och Miljöundersökning Bland Skogsarbetare: AI-rapport No. 5. Stockholm, Sweden: Arbetsmedicinska Instituttet; 1968, 44–52.
  • 23. Agate JN. An outbreak of cases of Raynaud’s phenomenon of occupational origin. Br J Ind Med 1949;6(3):144–163. 18132349.PubMedPMC
  • 24. Dinsdale G, Manning J, Herrick A, Dickinson M, Taylor C.. O15 Using a smartphone app to characterise and quantify skin colour changes in Raynaud’s attacks. Rheumatology 2021;60(Suppl 1):keab246.014.ArticlePDF
  • 25. Poole CJ, Bovenzi M, Nilsson T, Lawson IJ, House R, Thompson A, et al. International consensus criteria for diagnosing and staging hand-arm vibration syndrome. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2019;92(1):117–127. 30264331.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 26. Ye Y, Griffin MJ. Assessment of two alternative standardised tests for the vascular component of the hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Occup Environ Med 2016;73(10):701–708. 27535036.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 27. Bovenzi M. Finger systolic blood pressure indices for the diagnosis of vibration-induced white finger. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2002;75(1-2):20–28. 11898873.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 28. Jennings JR, Maricq HR, Canner J, Thompson B, Freedman RR, Wise R, et al. A thermal vascular test for distinguishing between patients with Raynaud’s phenomenon and healthy controls. Health Psychol 1999;18(4):421–426. 10431945.ArticlePubMed
  • 29. Bovenzi M. Vibration-induced white finger and cold response of digital arterial vessels in occupational groups with various patterns of exposure to hand-transmitted vibration. Scand J Work Environ Health 1998;24(2):138–144. 9630062.ArticlePubMed
  • 30. Olsen N. Finger systolic blood pressure during cooling in VWF; value of different diagnostic categories for a routine test method. Eighth International Conference on Hand-Arm Vibration; 9–12 June 1998; Umeå, Sweden. 1998;p. 19.
  • 31. Bovenzi M. Digital arterial responsiveness to cold in healthy men, vibration white finger and primary Raynaud’s phenomenon. Scand J Work Environ Health 1993;19(4):271–276. 8235516.ArticlePubMed
  • 32. Allen JA, Doherty CC, McGrann S. Objective testing for vasospasm in the hand-arm vibration syndrome. Br J Ind Med 1992;49(10):688–693. 1419856.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 33. Virokannas H, Rintamäki H. Finger blood pressure and rewarming rate for screening and diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon in workers exposed to vibration. Br J Ind Med 1991;48(7):480–484. 1854650.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 34. Kurozawa Y, Nasu Y, Nose T. Diagnostic value of finger systolic blood pressure in the assessment of vasospastic reactions in the finger skin of vibration-exposed subjects after finger and body cooling. Scand J Work Environ Health 1991;17(3):184–189. 2068557.ArticlePubMed
  • 35. Bovenzi M. Finger systolic pressure during local cooling in normal subjects aged 20 to 60 years: reference values for the assessment of digital vasospasm in Raynaud’s phenomenon of occupational origin. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1988;61(3):179–181. 3220589.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 36. Bovenzi M. Finger thermometry in the assessment of subjects with vibration-induced white finger. Scand J Work Environ Health 1987;13(4):348–351. 3324314.ArticlePubMed
  • 37. Ekenvall L, Lindblad LE. Vibration white finger and digital systolic pressure during cooling. Br J Ind Med 1986;43(4):280–283. 3964577.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 38. Olsen N, Nielsen SL, Voss P. Cold response of digital arteries in chain saw operators. Br J Ind Med 1982;39(1):82–88. 7066225.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 39. Olsen N, Nielsen SL. Diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon in quarrymen’s traumatic vasospastic disease. Scand J Work Environ Health 1979;5(3):249–256. 20120572.ArticlePubMed
  • 40. Xiao B, Zhang D, Yan M, Qu H, Wen W, Zhang X, et al. Cold water immersion test (10 °C, 10 min) for diagnosing vibration-induced white finger among a group of polishers in a subtropical environment. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2019;92(6):865–872. 30941544.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 41. Mirbod SM, Sugiura H. A non-invasive technique for the evaluation of peripheral circulatory functions in female subjects with Raynaud’s phenomenon. Ind Health 2017;55(3):275–284. 28321017.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 42. Mahbub MH, Ishitake T, Kurozawa Y, Toibana N, Ide F, Ohnari H, et al. Diagnostic performance of cold provocation test with hands immersion in water at 10°C for 5 min evaluated in vibration-induced white finger patients and matched controls. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2011;84(7):805–811. 21279646.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 43. Poole K, Elms J, Mason H. Cold-provocation testing for the vascular component of hand-arm vibration syndrome in health surveillance. Ind Health 2006;44(4):577–583. 17085918.ArticlePubMed
  • 44. Poole K, Elms J, Mason HJ. The diagnostic value of finger systolic blood pressure and cold-provocation testing for the vascular component of hand-arm vibration syndrome in health surveillance. Occup Med (Lond) 2004;54(8):520–527. 15520020.ArticlePubMed
  • 45. Mason HJ, Poole K, Saxton J. A critique of a UK standardized test of finger rewarming after cold provocation in the diagnosis and staging of hand-arm vibration syndrome. Occup Med (Lond) 2003;53(5):325–330. 12890832.ArticlePubMed
  • 46. Coughlin PA, Chetter IC, Kent PJ, Kester RC. The analysis of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of cold provocation thermography in the objective diagnosis of the hand-arm vibration syndrome. Occup Med (Lond) 2001;51(2):75–80. 11307693.ArticlePubMed
  • 47. Bogadi-Šare A, Zavalić M. Diagnostic value of finger thermometry and photoplethysmography in the assessment of hand-arm vibration syndrome. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1994;66(2):137–140. 7806397.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 48. Harada N. Esthesiometry, nail compression and other function tests used in Japan for evaluating the hand-arm vibration syndrome. Scand J Work Environ Health 1987;13(4):330–333. 3433034.ArticlePubMed
  • 49. Laroche GP, Thériault G. Validity of plethysmography and the digital temperature recovery test in the diagnosis of primary and occupational Raynaud’s phenomenon. Clin Invest Med 1987;10(2):96–102. 3581549.PubMed
  • 50. Pelmear PL, Roos J, Leong D, Wong L. Cold provocation test results from a 1985 survey of hard-rock miners in Ontario. Scand J Work Environ Health 1987;13(4):343–347. 3433036.ArticlePubMed
  • 51. Kurumatani N, Iki M, Hirata K, Moriyama T, Satoh M, Arai T. Usefulness of fingertip skin temperature for examining peripheral circulatory disturbances of vibrating tool operators. Scand J Work Environ Health 1986;12(4 Spec No):245–248. 3775309.ArticlePubMed
  • 52. Lim MJ, Kwon SR, Jung KH, Joo K, Park SG, Park W. Digital thermography of the fingers and toes in Raynaud’s phenomenon. J Korean Med Sci 2014;29(4):502–506. 24753696.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 53. Lee JW, Jeong WS, Lee SM, Kim J. Comparison of the diagnostic performances of two protocols of hand perfusion scintigraphy for Raynaud’s phenomenon. Nucl Med Commun 2012;33(10):1032–1038. 22773149.ArticlePubMed
  • 54. Kwon SR, Lim MJ, Park SG, Hyun IY, Park W. Diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon by (99m)Tc-hydroxymethylene diphosphonate digital blood flow scintigraphy after one-hand chilling. J Rheumatol 2009;36(8):1663–1670. 19531744.ArticlePubMed
  • 55. Sarikaya A, Ege T, Firat MF, Duran E. Assessment of digital ischaemia and evaluation of response to therapy by 99mTc sestamibi limb scintigraphy after local cooling of the hands in patients with vasospastic Raynaud’s syndrome. Nucl Med Commun 2004;25(2):207–211. 15154713.ArticlePubMed
  • 56. Pavlov-Dolijanovic S, Petrovic N, Vujasinovic Stupar N, Damjanov N, Radunovic G, Babic D, et al. Diagnosis of Raynaud’s phenomenon by 99mTc-pertechnetate hand perfusion scintigraphy: a pilot study. Rheumatol Int 2016;36(12):1683–1688. 27783160.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 57. Pavlov-Dolijanovic S, Petrovic N, Stupar NV, Damjanov N, Radunovic G, Radnic-Zivanovic T, et al. Diagnosis of Raynaud’s Phenomenon by 99mTc-Pertechnetate Hand Perfusion Scintigraphy: A Pilot Study. London, UK: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd; 2015.
  • 58. Lee KA, Chung HW, Lee SH, Kim HR. The use of hand perfusion scintigraphy to assess Raynaud’s phenomenon associated with hand-arm vibration syndrome. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2017;35(4):Suppl 106. 138–143. 28664836.PubMed
  • 59. Chong A, Ha JM, Song HC, Kim J, Choi SJ. Conversion to paradoxical finding on technetium-99m-labeled RBC scintigraphy after treatment for secondary Raynaud’s phenomenon. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;47(4):278–280. 24900125.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 60. Csiki Z, Galuska L, Garai I, Szabó N, Varga J, András C, et al. Raynaud’s syndrome: comparison of late and early onset forms using hand perfusion scintigraphy. Rheumatol Int 2006;26(11):1014–1018. 16604347.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 61. Galuska L, Garai I, Csiki Z, Varga J, Bodolay E, Bajnok L. The clinical usefulness of the fingers-to-palm ratio in different hand microcirculatory abnormalities. Nucl Med Commun 2000;21(7):659–663. 10994670.ArticlePubMed
  • 62. Bang SH, Oh YS, Park HJ, Lee TK, Yang JS, Lee SM, et al. Evaluation of finger blood flow with Tc-99m MDP (methylene diphosphonate). Korean J Intern Med 1992;7(2):94–101. 1306078.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 63. Kunnen JJ, Dahler HP, Doorenspleet JG, van Oene JC. Effects of intra-arterial ketanserin in Raynaud’s phenomenon assessed by 99MTc-pertechnetate scintigraphy. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1988;34(3):267–271. 2840293.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 64. Herrick AL. Pathogenesis of Raynaud’s phenomenon. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005;44(5):587–596. 15741200.ArticlePubMed
  • 65. Takeuchi T, Futatsuka M, Imanishi H, Yamada S. Pathological changes observed in the finger biopsy of patients with vibration-induced white finger. Scand J Work Environ Health 1986;12(4 Spec No):280–283. 3775312.ArticlePubMed
  • 66. Sauni R, Pääkkönen R, Virtema P, Toppila E, Uitti J. Dose-response relationship between exposure to hand-arm vibration and health effects among metalworkers. Ann Occup Hyg 2009;53(1):55–62. 19011125.PubMed
  • 67. Kim K, Kim J. A work-relatedness assessment in epidemiological case investigation of occupational cancers: I. Principles. Ann Occup Environ Med 2020;32(1):e30. 33072341.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 68. Violante FS. Criteria for diagnosis and attribution of an occupational musculoskeletal disease. Med Lav 2020;111(4):249–268. 32869763.PubMedPMC
  • 69. Cooke R. The Lewis–Prusik test. Time to Say Goodbye to an Old Friend?. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2014, 312–313.
  • 70. Proud G, Burke F, Lawson IJ, McGeoch KL, Miles JN. Trade MRPotDo. Cold provocation testing and hand–arm vibration syndrome—an audit of the results of the Department of Trade and Industry scheme for the evaluation of miners. Br J Surg 2003;90(9):1076–1079. 12945074.PubMed
  • 71. OECD.Stat. Health care resources. Medical technology. Updated 2021]. Accessed June 16, 2022]. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=HEALTH_REAC .
  • 72. The Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine. Nuclear medicine statistics. Updated 2021]. Accessed June 16, 2022]. https://www.ksnm.or.kr/ .
  • 73. Park N, Park M, Woo Y. Health and Welfare Statistical Year Book 2020. Wonju, Korea: National Health Insurance Service; 2020, 1–669.
  • 74. Gayraud M. Raynaud’s phenomenon. Joint Bone Spine 2007;74(1):e1–e8. 17218139.ArticlePubMed
  • 75. Bouhoutsos J, Morris T, Martin P. Unilateral Raynaud’s phenomenon in the hand and its significance. Surgery 1977;82(5):547–551. 918843.PubMed
  • 76. Yoon JK, Sim CS, Oh MS, Sung JH, Lee JH, Lee CR, et al. The general characteristics and results of the cold provocation test in the risk group of HAVS. Korean J Occup Environ Med 2012;24(3):207–216.ArticlePDF

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  
    • Raynaud’s Phenomenon: A Current Update on Pathogenesis, Diagnostic Workup, and Treatment
      Hirut Yadeta Ture, Nan Young Lee, Na Ri Kim, Eon Jeong Nam
      Vascular Specialist International.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef

    • PubReader PubReader
    • ePub LinkePub Link
    • Cite
      CITE
      export Copy Download
      Close
      Download Citation
      Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
      Format:
      • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
      • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
      Include:
      • Citation for the content below
      Technetium-99m hand perfusion scintigraphy (Raynaud’s scan) as a method of verification in hand arm vibration syndrome: a review
      Ann Occup Environ Med. 2022;34:e26  Published online October 11, 2022
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.35371/aoem.2022.34.e26
      Close
    • XML DownloadXML Download
    Technetium-99m hand perfusion scintigraphy (Raynaud’s scan) as a method of verification in hand arm vibration syndrome: a review
    Technetium-99m hand perfusion scintigraphy (Raynaud’s scan) as a method of verification in hand arm vibration syndrome: a review
    AuthorsPublication yearChilling temperature (°C)Chilling time (min)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)
    Olsen19 (by visual)19881055793
    (by slide)6191
    Pyykkö et al.18198612–15102595
    Pyykkö et al.201982151545
    Hellstrom and Myhre21197113–1620100100
    Kylin221968151050
    Agate231949151568
    AuthorsPublication yearChilling temperature (°C)Chilling time (min)Detection limit of finger systolic pressure (%)Sensitivity (%)Specificity (%)
    Ye and Griffin262016155< 809795
    Bovenzi272002105< 608794
    Jennings et al.28199910507988
    Bovenzi291998105< 6085.893.7
    Olsen30199815, 10, 65086100
    Bovenzi31199315, 105< 6084.297.8
    Allen et al.32199215, 10508188
    Virokannas et al.33199115, 105< 765084
    Kurozawa et al.341991105< 9081.790.3
    Bovenzi351988105< 6087.1100
    Olsen19198815, 65< 589664
    Bovenzi36198755< 6010089
    Ekenvall and Lindblad37198610< 6074
    Pyykkö et al.181986552595
    Olsen et al.38198215, 6509281
    Olsen and Nielsen39197915, 65092100
    AuthorsPublication yearChilling temperature (°C)Chilling time (min)Detection parameterThermometer typeSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)
    Xiao et al.4020191010T5min–T0min Infra-red thermal image camera76.770
    Mirbod and Sugiura41201751T5min Thermistor9086
    Ye and Griffin262016155t4°C Thermocouple7779
    Mahbub et al.422011105T5min Thermistor7070
    Poole et al.432006155Difference between T6min of tip and T6min of middle portionThermocouple + Infra-red thermal image camera57.685.7
    Poole et al.442004155t4°C Thermocouple70.877.3
    Mason et al.452003155t4°C Thermocouple65.858.5
    Coughlin et al.46200151T7min Infra-red thermal image camera10088
    Bogadi-Šare and Zavalić4719941010Recovery rate of finger skin temperatureThermocouple6972
    Harada4819871010T10min 22.498
    Bovenzi36198755Recovery rate of finger skin temperature6092
    Laroche and Theriault491987Digital temperature recovery time49.171.4
    Pelmear et al.5019871010t50% Thermocouple3984
    Kurumatani et al.5119861010T5min Thermistor91.173.3
    AuthorsPublication yearChilling typeChilling temperature (°C)Chilling time (min)Region of interestTechnetium typeDetection parameterSensitivity (%)Specificity (%)
    Lee et al.532012One-hand42Fingers region, palm regionTc-99m MDPInitial slope ratio8788
    Kwon et al.542009One-hand40.5Fingers regionTc-99m HDPInitial slope ratio91.293.3
    Sarikaya et al.552004One-handIced water0.5Whole handTc-99m sestamibiDecrease of perfusion10070
    Pavlov-Dolijanovic et al.562016NonFingers region, palm regionTc-99m pertechnetateFinger to palm ratio7970
    Pavlov-Dolijanovic et al.572015NonTc-99m pertechnetateFinger to palm ratio7274
    Lee et al.582017One-handRatios of the first peak height, Blood pool uptake
    Chong et al.592013One-hand41Fingers region, palm regionTc-99m RBCFinger to palm ratio
    Csiki et al.602006NonFingers region, palm regionTc-99m DTPAFinger to palm ratio
    Galuska et al.612000NonFingers region, palm regionTc-99m DTPAFinger to palm ratio
    Bang et al.621992One-hand40.5Fingers regionTc-99m MDPCumulative digital blood flow ratio, Initial slope ratio
    Kunnen et al.631988Both-handIced waterUntil tuned pale and/or pain notedTc-99m pertechnetateRadioactivity ratio of Peak level and plateau level
    TestAdvantageDisadvantageMedian of sensitivity (range)Median of specificity (range)
    Cold provocation, Finger skin color testLow cost, easy to test, high specificityNon-objective results, low sensitivity57 (25–100)94 (91–100)
    Cold provocation, Finger systolic pressure testStandardized method, low pain (due to local cooling), high sensitivity, high specificityNeed new equipment and operator, test only one finger at once85.9 (25–100)93.7 (64–100)
    Cold provocation, Finger skin temperature testEasy to testLow sensitivity69.5 (22.4–100)78.2 (58.5–98)
    Raynaud's Scan (one-hand chilling method)Ready to use equipment, operator, specialist in many hospitals, high sensitivity, high specificityExpensive equipment91.2 (87–100)88 (70–93.3)
    Raynaud's Scan (non-chilling method)Ready to use equipment, operator, specialist in many hospitalsExpensive equipment, low sensitivity, low specificity75.5 (72–79)72 (70–74)
    Table 1 Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger skin color change

    Table 2 Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger systolic pressure

    Table 3 Characteristics of cold provocation test with finger skin temperature

    aTχmin: finger skin temperature after immersion χmin; btχºC: times for fingers to rewarm by χºC; ctχ%: times for recovery for χ%.

    Table 4 Characteristics of Raynaud’s scan

    Table 5 Comparison between tests

    Table 1

    Table 2

    Table 3

    Table 4

    Table 5

    Ann Occup Environ Med : Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
    © Korean Society of Occupational & Environmental Medicine.
    Close layer
    TOP