Joël Greffier, Asma Arjoun, Chris Serrand, Jean-Paul Beregi, Djamel Dabli
{"title":"Fetal dose in pregnant CT patients: a comparison of four software packages.","authors":"Joël Greffier, Asma Arjoun, Chris Serrand, Jean-Paul Beregi, Djamel Dabli","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11594-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the fetal dose (FD) as calculated by four different software packages for pregnant women who have undergone CT acquisitions directly exposing the whole fetus to X-rays.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Pregnant women who underwent CT abdomen-pelvis and/or thorax-abdomen-pelvis acquisitions from February 2018 to May 2024 and for whom the uterine dose and/or FD was calculated by a medical physicist were retrospectively included. FDs were computed per CT acquisition with VirtualDose-CT™ (VDCT), Duke Organ Dose (DOD), fetaldose.org, and COnceptus Dose Estimation (CODE) software, using phantoms taking the stage of pregnancy into account. FDs calculated by each software package were then compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 pregnant women with a mean age of 30.2 ± 5.7 years at 17.5 ± 10.0 weeks of pregnancy were included. The mean number of CT acquisitions per pregnant patient was 1.4 ± 0.7 with a mean CTDI<sub>vol</sub> of 6.77 ± 3.04 [2.34-15.64] mGy, and FDs were computed for a total of 69 acquisitions. For all CT acquisitions, the median FD was 8.6 (6.8; 10.3) mGy for VDCT, 7.7 (6.1; 9.7) mGy for DOD, 6.3 (4.9; 7.6) mGy for fetaldose.org, and 7.1 (4.6; 8.8) mGy for CODE. Differences between each software package were significant (p < 0.01), except between VDCT and DOD (p = 0.025) and between CODE and fetaldose.org (p = 0.15). The concordance of calculated FD values between the software packages was poor (ICC < 0.50), except between VDCT and CODE and between fetaldose.org and CODE.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The choice of software used affects the calculation of the FD.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question Differences between calculation software in terms of morphologies and types of phantoms used have an impact on FD calculations? Findings Software choice has an impact on calculated FD, but is not expected to alter patient management except for extreme cases with multiple CT exams. Clinical relevance The FD limit of 100 mGy, defined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, cannot be reached with a single CT examination, and may only be of concern in cases where the patient undergoes multiple exams with the whole fetus exposed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"6258-6267"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12417268/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11594-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the fetal dose (FD) as calculated by four different software packages for pregnant women who have undergone CT acquisitions directly exposing the whole fetus to X-rays.
Materials and methods: Pregnant women who underwent CT abdomen-pelvis and/or thorax-abdomen-pelvis acquisitions from February 2018 to May 2024 and for whom the uterine dose and/or FD was calculated by a medical physicist were retrospectively included. FDs were computed per CT acquisition with VirtualDose-CT™ (VDCT), Duke Organ Dose (DOD), fetaldose.org, and COnceptus Dose Estimation (CODE) software, using phantoms taking the stage of pregnancy into account. FDs calculated by each software package were then compared.
Results: A total of 51 pregnant women with a mean age of 30.2 ± 5.7 years at 17.5 ± 10.0 weeks of pregnancy were included. The mean number of CT acquisitions per pregnant patient was 1.4 ± 0.7 with a mean CTDIvol of 6.77 ± 3.04 [2.34-15.64] mGy, and FDs were computed for a total of 69 acquisitions. For all CT acquisitions, the median FD was 8.6 (6.8; 10.3) mGy for VDCT, 7.7 (6.1; 9.7) mGy for DOD, 6.3 (4.9; 7.6) mGy for fetaldose.org, and 7.1 (4.6; 8.8) mGy for CODE. Differences between each software package were significant (p < 0.01), except between VDCT and DOD (p = 0.025) and between CODE and fetaldose.org (p = 0.15). The concordance of calculated FD values between the software packages was poor (ICC < 0.50), except between VDCT and CODE and between fetaldose.org and CODE.
Conclusion: The choice of software used affects the calculation of the FD.
Key points: Question Differences between calculation software in terms of morphologies and types of phantoms used have an impact on FD calculations? Findings Software choice has an impact on calculated FD, but is not expected to alter patient management except for extreme cases with multiple CT exams. Clinical relevance The FD limit of 100 mGy, defined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, cannot be reached with a single CT examination, and may only be of concern in cases where the patient undergoes multiple exams with the whole fetus exposed.
期刊介绍:
European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field.
This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies.
From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.