Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To describe the first experience of patient dose optimization in developing AQD, SSDE and image quality-related DRLs for common CT examinations in the adult age group using the concept of AQD.
Materials and methods
The recent published IQSC from 0 to 4 were used by radiologists for the assessment of image quality. The entire data were collected for five types (brain CT, chest CT, chest HRCT, abdomen KUB CT and abdomen + pelvic CT) CT investigations based on anatomic region (head, chest and abdomen + pelvic). The entire datasets of 264 patients were categorized into three groups based on their weights: group-1 (41–60 kg), group-2 (61–80 kg) and group-3 (81–100 kg). Only score-3 images were considered to assess median and 75th percentile values of CTDIvol and DLP to obtain AQDs and DRLs, respectively.
Results
Following the practical training of four radiologists on image quality scoring criteria for CT images, 264 (92%) out of 288 patient images were clinically acceptable as per IQSC for the study. The AQD (median) values in terms of CTDIvol for the mentioned weight groups were 25.8, 2.7, and 30.6 mGy, while the median DLP values for these groups were 496, 510 and 557 mGycm, respectively, for brain CT. The 75th percentile values in terms of CTDIvol were 30.2, 35.3 and 36.2 mGy, while in terms of DLP, they were 583, 619 and 781 mGycm for brain CT, respectively. Similar results are presented for the above-mentioned procedures, as well as in terms of SSDE.
Conclusion
The first ever experience in obtaining AQD, SSDE and DRLs values for specific CT procedures couples image quality with dose indices, showing comparable values with other relevant studies. Hence, it will provide a baseline for comparison within the facility for future studies and facilitate dose optimization for other facilities aiming for improvement.
Funder
Hamad Medical Corporation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Pandharipande PV, Reisner AT, Binder WD, et al. CT in the emergency department: a real-time study of changes in physician decision making. RSNA. 2016;278(3):812–21.
2. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ, Berdon WE. Estimated risks of radiation induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR. 2001;176:289–96.
3. UNCSEAR 2020/2021 Report Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation, report to the General Assembly Scientific Annex: A Evaluation of medical exposure to ionizing radiation. ISBN: 978–92–1–139206–7, V-I:11–12
4. Kharita MH, Alnaemi H, Kini V, Alkhazzam S, Rehani MM. Development of image quality related reference doses called acceptable quality doses (AQD) in pediatric CT exams in Qatar. Eur J Radiol. 2020;31:3098–105.
5. Razali MAS, Ahmad MZ, Roslee MAAM, Osman ND. Establishment of institutional diagnostic reference level for T imaging associated with multiple anatomical regions. Journal of Physics Conf Series. 2019;1248: 012067.