Radiopharmaceutical Extravasation: Dose & Reporting

Q: What is radiopharmaceutical extravasation?

Radiopharmaceutical extravasation—also called infiltration—occurs when part of an intravenous nuclear medicine injection deposits into the soft tissue around the vein instead of entering the bloodstream. The trapped activity delivers a localized radiation dose to nearby tissue and skin, and, for diagnostic scans, can reduce the activity that reaches the target and distort quantitation such as SUV.

Q: How much radiation dose can an extravasation deliver?

It depends on the radionuclide, the activity trapped, the volume, and how quickly the body clears it. Published estimates for significant events range from under 1 gray to more than 20 gray of local tissue dose, with the highest values reported for therapy isotopes such as lutetium-177. Many minor infiltrations, by contrast, deliver low skin dose because the dermis absorbs low-energy particles before they reach the radiosensitive epidermis.

Q: Is a radiopharmaceutical extravasation a reportable medical event?

Historically, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has treated most extravasations as exempt from medical-event reporting under 10 CFR Part 35, and that exemption has been the subject of active petition and review. Regardless of the reporting outcome, a significant extravasation can exceed the 0.5 sievert dose-equivalent threshold used elsewhere for tissue-dose concern, so a program should identify, quantify, and document notable events.

Q: How is the local dose from an extravasation estimated?

Physicists use MIRD self-dose methods or Monte Carlo simulation. The trapped activity and its effective half-life give the time-integrated (cumulated) activity, and the energy deposited locally per decay divided by the tissue mass gives the absorbed dose. Skin dose to the epidermis is calculated separately as a shallow dose equivalent, often with dedicated skin-dosimetry software.

Q: How can extravasations be prevented?

Good venous access technique, appropriately sized catheters, confirming patency before injection, avoiding small or fragile veins, and post-injection observation all reduce risk. Some programs use injection-site monitoring systems to detect infiltration in real time. A structured quality-improvement program that tracks extravasation rates and applies failure-mode analysis drives the frequency down over time.

Q: Why does extravasation matter for diagnostic scan quality?

Activity trapped at the injection site is activity that does not reach the target tissue, which can lower lesion uptake, cause erroneous quantitation, and create image artifacts. Studies have reported SUV underestimation of roughly 19% to 73% in affected diagnostic cases, sometimes requiring a repeat scan with additional radiation exposure, cost, and delay.

Radiopharmaceutical extravasation deposits part of an injected dose into the soft tissue around the vein instead of the bloodstream, and in significant events the local absorbed dose can reach several gray—making it a radiation-safety and dosimetry problem, not just an injection mishap. ^{1, 3} A defensible nuclear medicine program knows how to identify a notable extravasation, estimate the local dose, document it, and decide whether it must be reported.

Introduction

Every intravenous radiopharmaceutical injection assumes the activity enters the bloodstream and distributes as intended. When some of it leaks into the perivascular tissue—an event called extravasation or infiltration—two things happen at once. The trapped activity delivers a concentrated radiation dose to a small volume of tissue and overlying skin, and, for a diagnostic study, the activity that should have reached the target is diminished, degrading image quality and quantitation. ^{2, 3}

For years, extravasations were treated as a minor, expected nuisance requiring no specific action. That assumption has been challenged. Dosimetry studies have shown that significant events can deliver local tissue doses well into the range where deterministic effects are possible, and that diagnostic extravasations can distort SUV enough to change a read. ^{2, 3} At the same time, careful large-scale measurement has shown that many minor infiltrations deliver low skin dose, because the dermis shields the radiosensitive epidermis from low-energy particles. ⁵ The truth is nuanced: most extravasations are trivial, but a minority are not, and a program needs the tools to tell them apart.

This guide explains the physics of extravasation dosimetry, what the published dose estimates actually show, how the event affects image quality, and how to build detection, prevention, documentation, and reporting into a radiation-safety program. DRPS supports nuclear medicine facilities on exactly these questions through its radiation safety officer and PET/CT and nuclear medicine physics services across Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Washington DC, California, and Nevada.

Topic Explanation

What extravasation is and why it happens

Extravasation is the unintended deposition of an injected radiopharmaceutical into the tissue surrounding the intended vein. ³ It ranges from a trace leak that has no clinical consequence to a substantial infiltration that traps a large fraction of the administered activity. Common contributors are the same as for any intravenous injection: fragile or small veins, a catheter that is not fully within the lumen, an infusion that runs too fast for the vessel, valve or positioning problems, and difficult venous access in patients who have had many prior injections. ^{3, 10}

The nuclear medicine consequence is unique because the injectate is radioactive. Whereas a saline infiltration resolves on its own, an extravasated radiopharmaceutical continues to irradiate the tissue until it clears biologically or decays. ³ The magnitude depends on four variables: the radionuclide's emissions and half-life, the activity trapped, the tissue volume it occupies, and the effective clearance rate from the site. Those same four variables are the inputs to the dose calculation.

Because extravasation touches dose, image quality, documentation, and potentially reporting, it belongs to the radiation-safety officer's domain as much as the technologist's. It connects naturally to the program's broader duties around medical event reporting and skin dose from radioactive contamination.

The two distinct dose questions

An extravasation raises two separate dosimetry questions that must not be conflated: ¹

Tissue self-dose — the absorbed dose to the local soft-tissue volume that contains the activity, driven mostly by beta particles (or positrons) and reported in gray (Gy).
Skin shallow-dose equivalent — the dose to the radiosensitive basal layer of the overlying skin, reported in sievert (Sv), which governs whether a deterministic skin reaction is possible.

These can differ substantially. A deep infiltration may deliver high self-dose to soft tissue while the epidermis, shielded by intervening dermis, receives far less. ⁵ Both are calculated, but they answer different clinical and regulatory questions.

Key Technical Principles

Estimating the local absorbed dose

The local self-dose from trapped activity follows the MIRD self-dose formalism. First, the time-integrated (cumulated) activity is the trapped activity integrated over time, which for a single exponential clearance is: ^{1, 4}

\tilde{A} = 1.443 \cdot T_{eff} \cdot A_{0}

where $A_{0}$ is the activity trapped at the injection site and $T_{eff}$ is the effective half-life (combining physical decay and biological clearance). The absorbed dose to the local tissue mass is then the total non-penetrating energy deposited divided by that mass: ¹

D = \frac{A ~ \cdot E ˉ}{m}

where $\overset{ˉ}{E}$ is the mean energy deposited locally per decay and $m$ is the mass of the irradiated tissue.

Worked example (illustrative). Suppose 100 MBq of an $^{18}$ F-labeled tracer (mean positron energy ≈ 0.25 MeV) is trapped in about 20 g of tissue with an effective half-life of 1 hour:

\tilde{A} = 1.443 \times 1 h \times 100 MBq \approx 1.44 \times 1 0^{2} MBq\cdoth \approx 5.2 \times 1 0^{11} decays

D = \frac{( 5.2 \times 1 0 ^{11} ) ( 0.25 MeV \times 1.602 \times 1 0 ^{- 13} J/MeV )}{0.020 kg} \approx 1.0 Gy

This order-of-magnitude estimate—about 1 Gy—illustrates how even a diagnostic tracer can deliver a non-trivial local dose when a large fraction is trapped, and how sensitive the result is to the trapped activity, the volume, and the effective half-life. Real cases span a wide range, as the published data below show. In practice, skin shallow-dose equivalent is computed separately with dedicated skin-dosimetry software, and complex geometries are handled with Monte Carlo simulation. ^{1, 5}

What the published dose estimates show

The literature spans measured patient cases, clinical case reports, and Monte Carlo modeling. Read together, it shows both that significant events can be serious and that many events are minor. ^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}

Study / scenario	Radionuclide	Reported absorbed dose	Notes
26 patients, uptake-probe dosimetry ¹	$^{18}$ F-FDG, $^{99 m}$ Tc-MDP	0.6–11.2 Gy tissue; 0.1–5.4 Sv to 10 cm² skin	MIRD + skin-dosimetry software
5 clinical diagnostic cases ²	Diagnostic tracers	1.1–8.7 Gy to 5 cm³; up to 4.2 Sv skin	Also 19–73% SUV underestimation
Monte Carlo scenarios ³	$^{177}$ Lu / $^{99 m}$ Tc / $^{18}$ F	5.5–23.5 / 0.9–12.4 / 1.5–16.2 Gy	Hypothetical infiltration volumes/activities
Therapy case report ⁴	$^{177}$ Lu-DOTATATE (7.4 GBq)	2.3–6.8 Gy	Rapid lymphatic drainage, effective half-life ≈ 2.3 h
1,000-patient PET series ⁵	$^{18}$ F / $^{68}$ Ga	Worst-case epidermis < 1 Gy	Dermis shields epidermis; low measured frequency
XCAT Monte Carlo ⁶	$^{18}$ F / $^{68}$ Ga	Hypodermis 1.32 / 0.99 Gy	Epidermis 0.07–0.29 Gy

Two lessons emerge. First, therapy radionuclides such as lutetium-177 carry the highest potential for tissue harm, so therapy extravasations deserve the most attention. ^{3, 4} Second, for diagnostic tracers the radiosensitive epidermis is often spared because low-energy positrons are absorbed in the dermis before reaching it, and careful measurement finds the frequency of high-activity infiltration to be low. ^{5, 6} A defensible program neither ignores extravasation nor over-reacts to every trace leak; it quantifies the events that matter.

Clinical Impact

The clinical stakes fall into two buckets: tissue effects and diagnostic accuracy.

On the tissue side, a large extravasation—particularly of a therapy radiopharmaceutical—can in principle reach absorbed doses associated with deterministic effects such as erythema, and rare severe cases have prompted intervention. ^{3, 4} Management options that have been used include local heat or massage to promote dispersion, limb elevation, and, in selected cases, hyaluronidase to speed reabsorption of the extravasate. ⁹ Most events, however, resolve without complication, as several case reports of therapy extravasations with uneventful follow-up illustrate. ¹⁰

On the diagnostic side, activity trapped at the injection site is activity that never reaches the target. For quantitative PET, this can underestimate lesion SUV, produce erroneous quantitation, and generate artifacts; reported SUV underestimation in affected cases has ranged from roughly 19% to 73%, sometimes forcing a repeat scan with the associated additional exposure, cost, and delay. ² For therapy, an extravasated dose is a dose not delivered to the target, which can undertreat the intended lesion. Either way, the injection quality directly affects the value of the study.

A subtle but important driver of the tissue dose is how fast the body clears the extravasate. Two events with the same trapped activity can produce very different doses if one drains quickly through the lymphatics and the other lingers. In a documented lutetium-177 DOTATATE case, rapid lymphatic drainage gave an effective local half-life of only about 2.3 hours, which held the estimated dose in the lower part of the deterministic range and spared the patient any clinical consequence. ⁴ This is why the effective half-life—not just the activity—belongs in every dose estimate, and why massage, heat, and limb elevation, which promote dispersion, can meaningfully reduce the delivered dose when applied early. It also explains why a program cannot judge severity from the trapped activity alone; the time course matters.

These realities have pushed the field toward treating injection quality as a measurable quality metric rather than an assumed given. Structured incident-driven risk-management tools—failure-mode-and-effects analysis and fault-tree analysis applied to the injection workflow—are now being used to prioritize and reduce extravasation risk systematically. ⁷

Practical Optimization Tips

A practical extravasation program has four pillars: prevent, detect, quantify, and document.

1. Prevent

Reduce the rate at the source with good venous access practice: choose an appropriately sized catheter, confirm patency before administering activity, avoid small or fragile veins and previously used sites where possible, and observe the site during and after injection. ^{3, 10} Track extravasation rates and feed them into a quality-improvement loop. ⁷

2. Detect

Recognize infiltration promptly. Visual inspection, patient-reported discomfort, and imaging that includes the injection site all help; some programs deploy injection-site monitoring systems that flag infiltration in real time so a scan can be adjusted or repeated appropriately. ^{1, 5}

3. Quantify the events that matter

When a significant extravasation is suspected—especially for therapy radionuclides or a large trapped fraction—estimate the local tissue self-dose and the skin shallow-dose equivalent using MIRD or Monte Carlo methods and dedicated skin-dosimetry software. ^{1, 5} Not every trace leak warrants a full calculation, but events that could approach dose thresholds do.

4. Document and follow up

Record the event, the estimated dose, and the follow-up plan. For events approaching deterministic thresholds, arrange clinical follow-up for delayed skin or soft-tissue reactions. ¹ Report adverse events through the program's reporting system so patterns can be recognized and addressed; facilities with active reporting cultures capture far more events than passive ones. ⁸

Common pitfalls to avoid

Assuming all extravasations are harmless. Most are minor, but therapy and high-activity events can reach doses of clinical concern. ^{3, 4}
Ignoring the effect on the scan. A missed infiltration can produce a non-diagnostic study or a misleadingly low SUV. ²
Conflating tissue self-dose with skin dose. They are different quantities answering different questions and must be calculated separately. ^{1, 5}
Having no reporting culture. Under-reporting hides the events a program needs to see to improve. ⁸
Skipping the physicist. Dose estimation and threshold interpretation are medical-physics tasks, not judgment calls at the injection chair. ¹

Regulatory Considerations

Extravasation sits at the boundary of dose limits, medical-event reporting, and quality management—and the regulatory treatment has been actively evolving. Radiopharmaceutical medical use is governed by 10 CFR Part 35 (or the equivalent Agreement State program), with the underlying protection standards in 10 CFR Part 20.

Key points to reference:

Medical-event reporting. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has historically treated most radiopharmaceutical extravasations as exempt from the medical-event reporting requirements of 10 CFR Part 35, and that exemption has been the subject of active petition and review. ² A program should track the current status of this rulemaking and set its internal policy accordingly.
Dose thresholds for concern. Dosimetry work frames significance around the 0.5 Sv (50 rem) dose-equivalent level used elsewhere in the medical-event framework and the roughly 1.0 Sv level at which tissue effects begin to be anticipated; significant extravasations can exceed both. ³ These thresholds are useful even where reporting is not mandated, because they define which events warrant quantification and follow-up.
Radiation protection program. 10 CFR Part 20 requires a program to keep doses as low as reasonably achievable and to control unintended exposures; documenting and managing significant extravasations is consistent with that obligation. ³

Among the states DRPS serves, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, California, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey are NRC Agreement States that administer medical use under their own radiation-control rules, while Washington DC and Delaware are regulated directly by the NRC. A facility should confirm which authority licenses its medical use and align its extravasation policy—identification criteria, dose-estimation triggers, documentation, and any reporting—with that authority's current expectations. For the broader reporting framework, see medical event reporting under 10 CFR 35.3045.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is radiopharmaceutical extravasation?

Radiopharmaceutical extravasation—also called infiltration—occurs when part of an intravenous nuclear medicine injection deposits into the soft tissue around the vein instead of entering the bloodstream. The trapped activity delivers a localized radiation dose to nearby tissue and skin, and, for diagnostic scans, can reduce the activity that reaches the target and distort quantitation such as SUV.

How much radiation dose can an extravasation deliver?

It depends on the radionuclide, the activity trapped, the volume, and how quickly the body clears it. Published estimates for significant events range from under 1 gray to more than 20 gray of local tissue dose, with the highest values reported for therapy isotopes such as lutetium-177. Many minor infiltrations, by contrast, deliver low skin dose because the dermis absorbs low-energy particles before they reach the radiosensitive epidermis.

Is a radiopharmaceutical extravasation a reportable medical event?

Historically, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has treated most extravasations as exempt from medical-event reporting under 10 CFR Part 35, and that exemption has been the subject of active petition and review. Regardless of the reporting outcome, a significant extravasation can exceed the 0.5 sievert dose-equivalent threshold used elsewhere for tissue-dose concern, so a program should identify, quantify, and document notable events.

How is the local dose from an extravasation estimated?

Physicists use MIRD self-dose methods or Monte Carlo simulation. The trapped activity and its effective half-life give the time-integrated (cumulated) activity, and the energy deposited locally per decay divided by the tissue mass gives the absorbed dose. Skin dose to the epidermis is calculated separately as a shallow dose equivalent, often with dedicated skin-dosimetry software.

How can extravasations be prevented?

Good venous access technique, appropriately sized catheters, confirming patency before injection, avoiding small or fragile veins, and post-injection observation all reduce risk. Some programs use injection-site monitoring systems to detect infiltration in real time. A structured quality-improvement program that tracks extravasation rates and applies failure-mode analysis drives the frequency down over time.

Why does extravasation matter for diagnostic scan quality?

Activity trapped at the injection site is activity that does not reach the target tissue, which can lower lesion uptake, cause erroneous quantitation, and create image artifacts. Studies have reported SUV underestimation of roughly 19% to 73% in affected diagnostic cases, sometimes requiring a repeat scan with additional radiation exposure, cost, and delay.

Key Takeaways

Extravasation is a dosimetry problem, not just an injection mishap. Trapped activity irradiates local tissue until it clears or decays. ³
Significant events can reach several gray—or more. Reported estimates range from under 1 Gy to over 20 Gy, highest for therapy isotopes such as lutetium-177. ^{1, 3, 4}
Many minor events are low-dose to skin. The dermis shields the radiosensitive epidermis, and high-activity infiltration is measured to be infrequent. ^{5, 6}
Tissue self-dose and skin shallow-dose equivalent are different quantities. They answer different clinical and regulatory questions and are calculated separately. ^{1, 5}
Diagnostic extravasation degrades quantitation. SUV underestimation of ~19–73% has been reported, sometimes forcing a repeat scan. ²
Reporting has been evolving. The NRC has historically exempted extravasations from medical-event reporting, a position under active review; a defensible program identifies, quantifies, and documents notable events regardless. ^{2, 3}

Conclusion

Radiopharmaceutical extravasation has moved from an ignored footnote to a recognized quality and radiation-safety issue. The physics is clear: activity trapped in tissue delivers a local dose that, in significant events, can reach the range of deterministic effects, and in diagnostic studies can quietly corrupt the SUV a physician relies on. The data are also clear that most events are minor—which is precisely why a program needs the ability to distinguish the few that matter from the many that do not.

The path forward is not alarm but discipline: prevent extravasations with good technique, detect them promptly, quantify the ones that could approach dose thresholds, document and follow up, and keep the program's policy aligned with a reporting framework that is still evolving. A nuclear medicine program that treats injection quality as a measurable metric protects its patients, its image quality, and its regulatory standing at the same time.

How DRPS Can Help

Diagnostic Radiation Physics Services helps nuclear medicine facilities turn extravasation from an unmanaged risk into a documented, defensible process. This includes local and skin dose estimation for significant events, extravasation policy and threshold development, quality-improvement and failure-mode analysis of the injection workflow, staff training, and radiation-safety-program support aligned with NRC and Agreement State expectations—delivered through our radiation safety officer, PET/CT and nuclear medicine physics, and medical physicist consulting services.

DRPS supports facilities across our service locations, including Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Washington DC, California, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware.

The goal is simple: make the safe injection the routine injection, and make every significant event one the program can identify, quantify, and stand behind.

Related Resources

References

Osborne D, Kiser JW, Knowland J, Townsend D, Fisher DR. Patient-specific extravasation dosimetry using uptake probe measurements. Health Physics. 2021;120(3):339-343. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000001375. PubMed
Osborne D, Lattanze R, Knowland J, Bryant TE, Barvi I, Fu Y, Kiser JW. The scientific and clinical case for reviewing diagnostic radiopharmaceutical extravasation long-standing assumptions. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8:684157. doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.684157. PubMed
Tsorxe IY, Hayes RB. Dose estimation for extravasation of 177Lu, 99mTc, and 18F. Health Physics. 2023;124(3):217-220. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000001653. PubMed
Tylski P, Pina-Jomir G, Bournaud-Salinas C, Jalade P. Tissue dose estimation after extravasation of 177Lu-DOTATATE. EJNMMI Physics. 2021;8(1):33. doi:10.1186/s40658-021-00378-3. PubMed
Sunderland JJ, Graves SA, York DM, Mundt CA, Bartel TB. Multicenter evaluation of frequency and impact of activity infiltration in PET imaging, including microscale modeling of skin-absorbed dose. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2023;64(7):1095-1101. doi:10.2967/jnumed.123.265891. PubMed
Tiwari A, Andriotty M, Agasthya G, Sunderland JJ, Osborne DR, Kapadia AJ. Dosimetric and biological impact of activity extravasation of radiopharmaceuticals in PET imaging. Medical Physics. 2025;52(2):801-813. doi:10.1002/mp.17520. PubMed
Strigari L, Menichelli D, Lodi Rizzini E, et al. Advancing risk management in nuclear medicine diagnostic and therapy through incident-driven risk management tools. Zeitschrift für Medizinische Physik. 2025;35(4):416-422. doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2025.03.004. PubMed
Agudo Martínez A, Sabatel Hernández G, Molina Mora M, et al. Radiopharmaceuticals adverse events management. Current Radiopharmaceuticals. 2025;18(1):45-55. doi:10.2174/0118744710284298240419115911. PubMed
Doornhof KR, de Lussanet de la Sablonière Q, Koolen SLW, Konijnenberg MW. Treatment of [99mTc]Tc-hydroxy-diphosphonate ([99mTc]Tc-HDP) extravasation using hyaluronidase. Pharmacology Research & Perspectives. 2024;12(4):e1232. doi:10.1002/prp2.1232. PubMed
de Vries-Huizing DMV, Cheung ZJ, Hendrikx JJMA, Donswijk ML, Versleijen MWJ. Extravasation after [177Lu]Lu-HA-DOTATATE therapy. Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2024;49(5):454-456. doi:10.1097/RLU.0000000000005137. PubMed