Development of size-specific institutional diagnostic reference levels for computed tomography protocols in neck imaging

被引：3
作者：
Steuwe A. [1 ]
Thomas C. [1 ]
Kraus B. [1 ]
Bethge O.T. [1 ]
Aissa J. [1 ]
Klosterkemper Y. [1 ]
Antoch G. [1 ]
Boos J. [1 ]
机构：
[1] University Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Düsseldorf
来源：
Journal of Radiological Protection | 2020年 / 40卷 / 01期
关键词：
computed tomography; diagnostic reference levels; neck CT imaging;
D O I：
10.1088/1361-6498/ab4d00
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Purpose: To develop size-specific institutional diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for computed tomography (CT) protocols used in neck CT imaging (cervical spine CT, cervical CT angiography (CTA) and cervical staging CT) and to compare institutional to national DRLs. Materials and methods: Cervical CT examinations (spine, n = 609; CTA, n = 505 and staging CT, n = 184) performed between 01/2016 and 06/2017 were included in this retrospective study. For each region and examination, the volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were determined and binned into size bins according to patient water-equivalent diameter (dw). Linear regression analysis was performed to calculate size-specific institutional DRLs for CTDIvol and DLP, applying the 75th percentile as the upper limit for institutional DRLs. The mean institutional CTDIvol and DLP were compared to national DRLs (CTDIvol 20 mGy for cervical spine CT (DLP 300 mGycm) and cervical CTA (DLP 600 mGycm), and CTDIvol 15 mGy for cervical staging CT (DLP 330 mGycm)). Results: The mean CTDIvol and DLP (standard deviation) were 15.2 4.1 mGy and 181.5 88.3 mGycm for cervical spine CT; 8.1 4.3 mGy and 280.2 164.3 mGycm for cervical CTA; 8.6 1.9 mGy and 162.8 85.0 mGycm for cervical staging CT. For all CT protocols, there was a linear increase in CTDIvol and DLP with increasing dw. For the CTDIvol, size-specific institutional DRLs increased with dw from 14 to 29 mGy for cervical spine CT, from 5 to 17 mGy for cervical CTA and from 8 to 13 mGy for cervical staging CT. For the DLP, size-specific institutional DRLs increased with dw from 130 to 510 mGycm for cervical spine CT, from 140 to 640 mGycm for cervical CTA and from 140 to 320 mGycm for cervical staging CT. Institutional DRLs were lower than national DRLs by 81% and 67% for cervical spine CT (dw = 17.8 cm), 43% and 51% for cervical CTA (dw = 19.5 cm) and 59% and 53% for cervical staging CT (dw = 18.8 cm) for CTDIvol and DLP, respectively. Conclusion: Size-specific institutional DRLs were generated for neck CT examinations. The mean institutional CTDIvol and DLP values were well below national DRLs. © 2019 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights reserved..
引用
收藏
页码：68 / 82
页数：14
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Liang C.R., Chen P.X.H., Kapur J., Ong M.K.L., Quek S.T., Kapur S.C., Establishment of institutional diagnostic reference level for computed tomography with automated dose-tracking software, J. Med. Radiat. Sci., 64, pp. 82-89, (2017)
  • [2] Ghetti C., Ortenzia O., Palleri F., Sireus M., Definition of local diagnostic reference levels in a radiology department using a dose tracking software, Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry, 175, pp. 38-45, (2017)
  • [3] Tonkopi E., Duffy S., Abdolell M., Manos D., Diagnostic reference levels and monitoring practice can help reduce patient dose from CT examinations, Am. J. Roentgenol., 208, pp. 1073-1081, (2017)
  • [4] Boos J., Meineke A., Rubbert C., Heusch P., Lanzman R.S., Aissa J., Antoch G., Kropil P., Cloud-based CT dose monitoring using the DICOM- structured report: Fully automated analysis in regard to national diagnostic reference levels, Fortschr Röntgenstr, 188, pp. 288-294, (2016)
  • [5] Walz M., Wucherer M., Loose R., What are the implications of the new radiation protection ordinance?, Radiologe, 59, pp. 457-466, (2019)
  • [6] Commission E., (2018)
  • [7] Boos J., Thomas C., Appel E., Klosterkemper Y., Schleich C., Aissa J., Bethge O.T., Antoch G., Kropil P., Institutional computed tomography diagnostic reference levels based on water-equivalent diameter and size-specific dose estimates, J. Radiol. Prot., 38, 2, pp. 536-548, (2018)
  • [8] McLaughlin P.D., Et al., Body composition determinants of radiation dose during abdominopelvic CT, Insights Imaging, 9, pp. 9-16, (2018)
  • [9] Leng S., Shiung M., Duan X., Yu L., Zhang Y., McCollough C.H., Size-specific dose estimates for chest, abdominal, and pelvic CT: Effect of intrapatient variability in water-equivalent diameter, Radiology, 276, pp. 184-190, (2015)
  • [10] Pyfferoen L., Mulkens T.H., Zanca F., De Bondt T., Parizel P.M., Casselman J.W., Benchmarking adult CT-dose levels to regional and national references using a dose-tracking software: A multicentre experience, Insights Imaging, 8, pp. 513-521, (2017)
1234