Joël Greffier, Asma Arjoun, Chris Serrand, Jean-Paul Beregi, Djamel Dabli
{"title":"妊娠CT患者的胎儿剂量:四个软件包的比较。","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
目的:比较四种不同的软件包计算的胎儿剂量(FD),孕妇接受CT采集直接暴露于x射线下的胎儿。材料和方法:回顾性纳入2018年2月至2024年5月期间接受腹部-骨盆和/或胸腹-骨盆CT采集并由医学物理学家计算子宫剂量和/或FD的孕妇。使用VirtualDose-CT™(VDCT)、Duke Organ Dose (DOD)、fetaldose.org和COnceptus Dose estimate (CODE)软件计算每次CT采集的fd,并将妊娠阶段考虑在内。然后比较各软件包计算的fd。结果:共纳入51例孕妇,平均年龄为30.2±5.7岁,妊娠17.5±10.0周。每位孕妇平均CT扫描次数为1.4±0.7次,平均CTDIvol为6.77±3.04 [2.34-15.64]mGy,共计算69次扫描的fd。对于所有CT图像,中位FD为8.6 (6.8;VDCT为7.7 (6.1;9.7) mGy为DOD, 6.3 (4.9;7.6) mGy for fetaldose.org, 7.1 (4.6;8.8) mGy为CODE。结论:使用的软件的选择影响FD的计算。计算软件在形态和所用幻影类型方面的差异对FD计算有影响吗?结果:软件选择对计算FD有影响,但除了多次CT检查的极端病例外,预计不会改变患者的管理。国际放射防护委员会(International Commission on Radiological Protection)规定的100 mGy的FD限值不能通过一次CT检查达到,只有在患者接受多次检查并暴露整个胎儿的情况下才值得关注。
Fetal dose in pregnant CT patients: a comparison of four software packages.
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.