Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Current Medical Imaging
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-4056
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6603
file format pdf download PDF
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Background

The majority of the existing diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) that have been established for computed tomography (CT) are based on various anatomical locations, such as the head, chest, abdomen, etc. However, DRLs are initiated to improve radiation protection by conducting a comparison of similar examinations with similar objectives. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of establishing dose baselines based on common CT protocols for patients who underwent enhanced CT abdomen and pelvis exams.

Methods

Dose length product total (tDLPs), volumetric CT dose index (CTDI), size-specific dose estimate (SSDE), effective dose (E), and scan acquisition parameters for a total of 216 adult patients, who underwent an enhanced CT abdomen and pelvis exams over a one-year period, were obtained and retrospectively analyzed. Spearman coefficient and one-way ANOVA tests were used to check significant differences between dose metrics and the different CT protocols.

Results

The data exhibited 9 different CT protocols to acquire an enhanced CT abdomen and pelvis exam at our institute. Out of these, 4 were found more common, , CT protocols were acquired for a minimum of 10 cases. Triphasic liver demonstrated the highest mean and median tDLPs across all 4 CT protocols. Triphasic liver protocol registered the highest E followed by gastric sleeve protocol with a mean of 28.7 and 24.7 mSv, respectively. Significant differences (p < 0.0001) were found between the tDLPs of anatomical location and the CT protocol.

Conclusion

Evidently, wide variability exists across CT dose indices and patient dose metrics relying on anatomical-based dose baseline, , DRLs. Patient dose optimizations require establishing dose baselines based on CT protocols rather than the anatomical location.

© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Science Publisher. This is an open access article published under CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
2023-07-07
2024-11-23

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/cmir/20/1/CMIR-20-E220523217204.html?itemId=/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. HongJ.Y. HanK. JungJ.H. KimJ.S. Association of exposure to diagnostic low-dose ionizing radiation with risk of cancer among youths in South Korea.JAMA201929e191058410.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1058431483470
     [Google Scholar]
  2. MathewsJ. ForsytheA. BradyZ. ButlerM. GoergenS. ByrnesG. Cancer risk in 680 000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: Data linkage study of 11 million Australians.BMJ20133462360
     [Google Scholar]
  3. BrennerD.J. HallE.J. Cancer risks from CT scans: Now we have data, what next?Radiology2012265233033110.1148/radiol.1212124822915598
     [Google Scholar]
  4. PearceM.S. SalottiJ.A. LittleM.P. McHughK. LeeC. KimK.P. HoweN.L. RonckersC.M. RajaramanP. CraftA.W. ParkerL. Berrington de GonzálezA. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: A retrospective cohort study.Lancet2012380984049950510.1016/S0140‑6736(12)60815‑022681860
     [Google Scholar]
  5. ShahD.J. SachsR.K. WilsonD.J. Radiation-induced cancer: A modern view.Br. J. Radiol.2012851020e1166e117310.1259/bjr/2502614023175483
     [Google Scholar]
  6. CaoC.F. MaK.L. ShanH. LiuT.F. ZhaoS.Q. WanY. Jun-Zhang WangH.Q. CT scans and cancer risks: A systematic review and doseresponse meta-analysis.BMC Cancer2022221123810.1186/s12885‑022‑10310‑236451138
     [Google Scholar]
  7. ShaoY.H. TsaiK. KimS. WuY.J. DemissieK. Exposure to tomographic scans and cancer risks.JNCI Cancer Spectr.202041pkz07210.1093/jncics/pkz07232337490
     [Google Scholar]
  8. National Research CouncilHealth Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2.Washington, DCThe National Academies Press2006
     [Google Scholar]
  9. PauloG. DamilakisJ. TsapakiV. SchegererA.A. RepussardJ. JaschkeW. FrijaG. HierathM. ClarkJ. Diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications in computed tomography: A literature review.Insights Imaging20201119610.1186/s13244‑020‑00899‑y32804275
     [Google Scholar]
  10. VañóE. MillerD.L. MartinC.J. RehaniM.M. KangK. RosensteinM. Ortiz-LópezP. MattssonS. PadovaniR. RogersA. ICRP Publication 135: Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging.Ann. ICRP2017461114410.1177/014664531771720929065694
     [Google Scholar]
  11. TreierR. ArouaA. VerdunF.R. SamaraE. StuessiA. TruebP.R. Patient doses in CT examinations in Switzerland: Implementation of national diagnostic reference levels.Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry20101422-424425410.1093/rpd/ncq27920926508
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Habib GeryesB. HornbeckA. JarrigeV. PierratN. Ducou Le PointeH. DreuilS. Patient dose evaluation in computed tomography: A French national study based on clinical indications.Phys. Med.201961182710.1016/j.ejmp.2019.04.00431151575
     [Google Scholar]
  13. DamilakisJ. FrijaG. JaschkeG. European study on clinical diagnostic reference levels for X-ray medical imaging.EUCLID2021
     [Google Scholar]
  14. TsapakiV. DamilakisJ. PauloG. SchegererA.A. RepussardJ. JaschkeW. FrijaG. CT diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications: results of a large-scale European survey.Eur. Radiol.20213174459446910.1007/s00330‑020‑07652‑533449177
     [Google Scholar]
  15. QaelumNV Dose patient radiation dose monitoring system user manual.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. RochP. CélierD. DessaudC. EtardC. RehaniM.M. Long-term experience and analysis of data on diagnostic reference levels: The good, the bad, and the ugly.Eur. Radiol.20203021127113610.1007/s00330‑019‑06422‑231529257
     [Google Scholar]
  17. DalahE.Z. AlsuwaidiJ.S. HamedM.S. GaniA.H.A. BeeviH.A.A. PanangatilA.G. FuntelarC.O. FerrerA.Y. Al HusseinS.G.A.B. AlbedwawiS.A. Challenges experienced in establishing clinical indication based diagnostic reference levels: Pilot study.Eur. J. Radiol.202214811004610.1016/j.ejrad.2021.11004635051731
     [Google Scholar]
  18. BotweB.O. SchandorfC. InkoomS. FaanuA. RolstadaasL. GoaP.E. National indication-based diagnostic reference level values in computed tomography: Preliminary results from Ghana.Phys. Med.20218427428410.1016/j.ejmp.2021.03.01233775566
     [Google Scholar]
  19. AlNaemiH. TsapakiV. OmarA.J. AlKuwariM. AlObadliA. AlkhazzamS. AlyA. KharitaM.H. Towards establishment of diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indication in the state of Qatar.Eur. J. Radiol. Open2020710028210.1016/j.ejro.2020.10028233145375
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Joseph ZiraD. Haruna YahayaT. UmarM.S. Nkubli BF. ChukwuemekaN.C. SidiM. EmmanuelR. IbrahimF.Z. LaushugnoS.S. OgenyiA.P. Clinical indication-based diagnostic reference levels for paediatric head computed tomography examinations in Kano Metropolis, northwestern Nigeria.Radiography202127261762110.1016/j.radi.2020.11.02133339745
     [Google Scholar]
  21. JärvinenH. SeuriR. KortesniemiM. LajunenA. HallinenE. Savikurki-HeikkiläP. LaarneP. PerhomaaM. TyrväinenE. Indication-based national diagnostic reference levels for paediatric CT: A new approach with proposed values.Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry20151651-4869010.1093/rpd/ncv04425833898
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
Loading
Establishing Protocol-based Dose Metrics for Common Abdomen and Pelvis Computed Tomography Protocols
Curr. Med. Imaging 20, e220523217204 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): Abdomen and pelvis +C; DRLs; Effective dose; Gastric sleeve; Pancreas phases; SSDE; Triphasic liver

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test