Establishing Protocol-based Dose Metrics for Common Abdomen and Pelvis Computed Tomography Protocols

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Entesar Zawam Dalah, Jamila Salam Alsuwaidi, Reem Salim AlKtebi, Muna Abdellatif Ali AlMulla, Priyank Gupta
{"title":"Establishing Protocol-based Dose Metrics for Common Abdomen and Pelvis Computed Tomography Protocols","authors":"Entesar Zawam Dalah, Jamila Salam Alsuwaidi, Reem Salim AlKtebi, Muna Abdellatif Ali AlMulla, Priyank Gupta","doi":"10.2174/1573405620666230522151357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Dose length product total (tDLPs), volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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, i.e., 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evidently, wide variability exists across CT dose indices and patient dose metrics relying on anatomical-based dose baseline, i.e., DRLs. Patient dose optimizations require establishing dose baselines based on CT protocols rather than the anatomical location.</p>","PeriodicalId":54215,"journal":{"name":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405620666230522151357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim: 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 (CTDIvol), 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, i.e., 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, i.e., DRLs. Patient dose optimizations require establishing dose baselines based on CT protocols rather than the anatomical location.

建立基于常规腹部和骨盆计算机断层扫描方案的剂量指标
背景与目的:现有的计算机断层扫描(CT)诊断参考水平(drl)大多是基于不同的解剖位置,如头部、胸部、腹部等。然而,开展DRLs是为了通过比较具有相似目标的类似检查来改善辐射防护。本研究的目的是探讨在常规CT方案的基础上,为接受增强CT腹部和骨盆检查的患者建立剂量基线的可行性。方法:对216例在一年时间内接受腹部和骨盆增强CT检查的成年患者的总剂量长度积(tdlp)、体积CT剂量指数(CTDIvol)、尺寸特异性剂量估计(SSDE)、有效剂量(E)和扫描获取参数进行回顾性分析。采用Spearman系数和单因素方差分析检验剂量指标和不同CT方案之间的显著差异。结果:数据显示了9种不同的CT方案,以获得增强CT腹部和骨盆检查在我所。其中,4例更为常见,即至少10例获得了CT协议。在所有4种CT方案中,三期肝表现出最高的平均和中位tdlp。三期肝方案的E值最高,其次是胃套方案,平均分别为28.7和24.7 mSv。解剖位置的tdlp与CT方案之间存在显著差异(p < 0.0001)。结论:显然,CT剂量指数和患者剂量指标之间存在很大的差异,这些指标依赖于基于解剖的剂量基线,即drl。患者剂量优化需要根据CT方案而不是解剖位置建立剂量基线。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
246
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Medical Imaging Reviews publishes frontier review articles, original research articles, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited thematic issues on all the latest advances on medical imaging dedicated to clinical research. All relevant areas are covered by the journal, including advances in the diagnosis, instrumentation and therapeutic applications related to all modern medical imaging techniques. The journal is essential reading for all clinicians and researchers involved in medical imaging and diagnosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信