Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multicentre survey on patient dose in paediatric imaging and proposal for updated diagnostic reference levels for France. Part 1: computed tomography

  • Paediatric
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To report on a dose survey conducted by the French societies of radiology and paediatric imaging (SFR and SFIPP) and the French public service expert in nuclear and radiological risks (IRSN), and to suggest new diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for paediatric CT.

Methods

Dose reports concerning children aged 0–15 years and five CT procedures (brain, petrous bone, mediastinum, lung and abdomen-pelvis) performed in 2015–2016 were collected from 15 imaging departments on a voluntary basis. Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were recorded for at least 10 patients per procedure, per centre and per age group. New DRLs were calculated as the 3rd quartiles of the distributions of the median values.

Results

Results from 3253 CT examinations were obtained. The exposure levels observed were much lower than for the previous surveys (2007–2008 and 2010–2013) and among the lowest values currently published. A good homogeneity between facilities was also observed. New DRLs are proposed for each procedure and age group.

Conclusions

This new survey contributes to the continuing optimisation process in French paediatric CT practice. Its results have been recently used to update the national paediatric CT DRLs.

Key Points

• New national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are proposed for several paediatric CT procedures.

• The DRLs proposed for brain, chest and abdomen-pelvis procedures are among the lowest published worldwide.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ATCM:

Automatic tube current modulation

COCIR:

European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry

CQV:

Coefficient of quartile variation

CT:

Computed tomography

CTDIvol :

Volume computed tomography dose index

DLP:

Dose-length product

DRL:

Diagnostic reference level

IAEA:

International Atomic Energy Agency

ICRP:

International Commission on Radiological Protection

IR:

Iterative reconstruction

IRSN:

Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire

PMMA:

Poly(methyl methacrylate)

Q 1 :

First quartile

Q 3 :

Third quartile

SFIPP:

Société Francophone d’Imagerie Pédiatrique et Prénatale

SFR:

Société Française de Radiologie

References

  1. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP et al (2012) Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 380:499–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. European Commission (2014) Medical radiation exposure of the European population. Radiation protection 180 part 1/2. European Commission, Brussels Available via http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/RP180.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dreuil S, Etard C (2017) Exposure of the French population to ionizing radiations from medical diagnostic procedures in 2012. Radioprotection 52:45–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. (1996) Radiological protection and safety in medicine. ICRP Publication 73. Ann ICRP 26:1–47

  5. (2007) The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:1–332

  6. Vañó E, Miller DL, Martin CJ et al (2017) ICRP publication 135: Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. Ann ICRP 46:1–144

  7. International Atomic Energy Agency (2014) Radiation protection and safety of radiation sources: international basic safety standards. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna Available via http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1578_web-57265295.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

    Google Scholar 

  8. International Atomic Energy Agency (2018) Radiation protection and safety in medical uses of ionizing radiation. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna Available via http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/PUB1775_web.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2019

    Google Scholar 

  9. Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom (2014) Official Journal of the European Union

  10. European Commission (1999) Guidance on diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for medical exposures - Radiation Protection 109. European Commission, Brussels. Available via http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/109_en.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  11. European Commission (2018) European guidelines on diagnostic reference levels for paediatric imaging. Radiation protection 185. European Commission, Brussels Available via http://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/rp_185.pdf. Accessed 19 Sept 2018

    Google Scholar 

  12. Arrêté du 12 février 2004 relatif aux niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire (2004) Journal officiel de la République Française

  13. Arrêté du 24 octobre 2011 relatif aux niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire (2012) Journal officiel de la République Française

  14. Brisse HJ, Aubert B (2009) Niveaux d’exposition en tomodensitométrie multicoupes pédiatrique : résultats de l’enquête dosimétrique SFIPP/IRSN 2007-2008 (full text in English on www.em-consulte.com/produit/jradio). J Radiol 90:207–215

  15. Roch P, Célier D, Dessaud C, Etard C (2018) Using diagnostic reference levels to evaluate the improvement of patient dose optimisation and the influence of recent technologies in radiography and computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 98:68–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Journy NMY, Dreuil S, Boddaert N et al (2018) Individual radiation exposure from computed tomography: a survey of paediatric practice in French university hospitals, 2010-2013. Eur Radiol 28:630–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Talbot A (2008) Analyse des données relatives à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire. Bilan 2004–2006. IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses. Available via http://nrd.irsn.fr/ressources. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  18. Roch P (2010) Analyse des données relatives à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire. Bilan 2007–2008. IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses. Available via http://nrd.irsn.fr/ressources. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  19. Roch P, Célier D (2012) Analyse des données relatives à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire. Bilan 2009–2010. IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses. Available via http://nrd.irsn.fr/ressources. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  20. Roch P, Célier D (2014) Analyse des données relatives à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire. Bilan 2011–2012. IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses. Available via http://nrd.irsn.fr/ressources. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  21. Roch P, Célier D (2016) Analyse des données relatives à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques en radiologie et en médecine nucléaire. Bilan 2013–2015. IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses. Available via http://nrd.irsn.fr/ressources. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  22. International Electrotechnical Commission (2016) Medical electrical equipment - part 2-44: particular requirements for the basic safety and essential performance of X-ray equipment for computed tomography. IEC 60601–2-44 standard (consolidated version)

  23. Thomas KE, Wang B (2008) Age-specific effective doses for pediatric MSCT examinations at a large children’s hospital using DLP conversion coefficients: a simple estimation method. Pediatr Radiol 38:645–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Huda W, Sterzik A, Tipnis S (2010) X-ray beam filtration, dosimetry phantom size and CT patient dose conversion factors. Phys Med Biol 55:551–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. AAPM report no 204. American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Alexandria, VA. Available via http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/rpt_204.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  26. Vassileva J, Rehani M, Kostova-Lefterova D et al (2015) A study to establish international diagnostic reference levels for paediatric computed tomography. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 165:70–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Décision du 22 novembre 2007 modifiée fixant les modalités du contrôle de qualité des scanographes (2007) Journal officiel de la République Française

  28. Bonett DG (2006) Confidence interval for a coefficient of quartile variation. Comput Stat Data Anal 50:2953–2957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brisse HJ, Robilliard M, Savignoni A et al (2009) Assessment of organ absorbed doses and estimation of effective doses from pediatric anthropomorphic phantom measurements for multi-detector row CT with and without automatic exposure control. Health Phys 97:303–314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Gay F, Pavia Y, Pierrat N, Lasalle S, Neuenschwander S, Brisse HJ (2014) Dose reduction with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for paediatric CT: phantom study and clinical experience on chest and abdomen CT. Eur Radiol 24:102–111

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Khawaja RD, Singh S, Otrakji A et al (2015) Dose reduction in pediatric abdominal CT: use of iterative reconstruction techniques across different CT platforms. Pediatr Radiol 45:1046–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yoon H, Kim MJ, Yoon CS et al (2015) Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric chest CT: effects of iterative reconstruction in normal weight and overweight children. Pediatr Radiol 45:337–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaul D, Kahn J, Huizing L et al (2016) Dose reduction in paediatric cranial CT via iterative reconstruction: a clinical study in 78 patients. Clin Radiol 71:1168–1177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kim HG, Lee HJ, Lee SK, Kim HJ, Kim MJ (2017) Head CT: image quality improvement with ASIR-V using a reduced radiation dose protocol for children. Eur Radiol 27:3609–3617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Société Francophone d’Imagerie Pédiatrique et Prénatale (2006) Critères de qualité et optimisation des doses en scanographie chez l’enfant. Société Francophone d’Imagerie Pédiatrique et Prénatale, Paris. Available via http://www.sfip-radiopediatrie.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/guideprocedurestdmpedi06.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2019

  36. Takei Y, Miyazaki O, Matsubara K et al (2016) Nationwide survey of radiation exposure during pediatric computed tomography examinations and proposal of age-based diagnostic reference levels for Japan. Pediatr Radiol 46:280–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim M, Chang K, Hwang J, Nam Y, Han D, Yoon J (2017) Radiation dose for pediatric and young adult CT: a survey to establish age-based reference levels of 2015-2016 in Korea. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 175:228–237

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Vanhaudenhove T, Van Slambrouck K, Fremout A (2017) Niveaux de référence diagnostiques nationaux en radiologie - Sixième itération pour les examens CT (01/11/2015–31/10/2016). Agence fédérale de contrôle nucléaire, Bruxelles. Available via http://afcn.fgov.be/fr/system/files/rapport-ct-iteration-6.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  39. Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (2016) Bekanntmachung der aktualisierten diagnostischen Referenzwerte für diagnostische und interventionelle Röntgenanwendungen. Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. Available via https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/BfS/DE/fachinfo/ion/drw-roentgen.html. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  40. European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry, (2016) Medical imaging equipment age profile & density - 2016 Edition. COCIR, Brussels. Available via http://www.cocir.org/uploads/media/16052_COC_AGE_PROFILE_web_01.pdf. Accessed 14 Jun 2018

  41. Rehani MM (2015) Limitations of diagnostic reference level (DRL) and introduction of acceptable quality dose (AQD). Br J Radiol 88:20140344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Arrêté du 23 mai 2019 portant homologation de la décision n°2019-DC-0667 de l’Autorité de sûreté nucléaire du 18 avril 2019 relative aux modalités d’évaluation des doses de rayonnements ionisants délivrées aux patients lors d’un acte de radiologie, de pratiques interventionnelles radioguidées ou de médecine nucléaire et à la mise à jour des niveaux de référence diagnostiques associés (2019) Journal officiel de la République Française

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to the staff (radiologists, medical physicists, managers and radiographers) of the imaging departments who participated in this study and who took the time to collect and check the data for plain radiography, diagnostic fluoroscopy and/or CT:

Hôpital Jean Minjoz (CHU), Besançon: Dr. M. Lenoir, B. Pigny.

Hôpital Pellegrin (CHU), Bordeaux: Pr JF. Chateil, M. Eresue-Bony.

Hôpital Femme mère Enfant (HCL), Bron: Dr. J. Payen de la Garanderie, P. Tylski.

Hôpital Couple Enfant (CHU), Grenoble: Dr. C. Durand, G. Reboulet.

Hôpital Bicêtre (AP-HP), Le Kremlin-Bicêtre: Pr C. Adamsbaum, Dr. B. Husson.

Hôpital de la Timone (AP-HM), Marseille: Pr Ph. Petit, Dr. B. Bourlière Najean, E. Bigand.

SELARL Imagerie médicale du Truc, Mérignac: Dr. M. Brun.

Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve (CHU), Montpellier: Dr. O. Prod’homme, Dr. I. Taleb Arrada, J. Le Roy.

SELARL Imagerie du Val, Limours: Dr. I. Ivert.

Hôpital d’Enfants Armand-Trousseau (AP-HP), Paris: Pr H. Ducou Le Pointe, A. Hornbeck.

Hôpital Necker (AP-HP), Paris: Pr N. Boddaert, B. Habib Geryes.

Hôpital Robert Debré (AP-HP), Paris: Pr M. Alison, C. Guegan.

Institut Curie, Paris: Dr. H. Brisse, N. Pierrat, S. Lasalle.

Hôpital Pontchaillou (CHU), Rennes: Dr. C. Treguier, G. Briand.

Hôpital Charles Nicolle (CHU), Rouen: Pr JN. Dacher, O. Lucas, N. Izambard.

Hôpital Hautepierre (CHU), Strasbourg: Dr. M. Koob, N. Wallior.

Hôpital Clocheville (CHU), Tours: Pr D. Sirinelli, MC. Dousteyssier, C. Fertault Coquet.

Hôpital d’Enfants Brabois (CHU), Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy: Dr. L. Mainard-Simard.

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire, 31 avenue de la Division Leclerc, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France

    David Célier, Patrice Roch & Cécile Etard

  2. Department of Pediatric Imaging, Hôpital d’enfants Armand-Trousseau APHP, 26 avenue du Docteur Arnold-Netter, Paris, France

    Hubert Ducou Le Pointe

  3. Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France

    Hubert Ducou Le Pointe

  4. French-Speaking Society for Pediatric and Prenatal Imaging (SFIPP), Paris, France

    Hubert Ducou Le Pointe & Hervé J. Brisse

  5. Imaging Department, Institut Curie, 26 rue d’Ulm, Paris, France

    Hervé J. Brisse

  6. Paris Sciences et Lettres Research University, Paris, France

    Hervé J. Brisse

Authors
  1. David Célier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrice Roch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cécile Etard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hubert Ducou Le Pointe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hervé J. Brisse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Célier.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Hervé J. Brisse.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because this study was a survey on patient doses to assess diagnostic reference levels, carried out in accordance with DRLs national regulations and international guidance.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was not required because this study was a survey on patient doses to assess diagnostic reference levels, carried out in accordance with DRLs national regulations and international guidance.

Methodology

• Prospective

• Multicentre study

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Célier, D., Roch, P., Etard, C. et al. Multicentre survey on patient dose in paediatric imaging and proposal for updated diagnostic reference levels for France. Part 1: computed tomography. Eur Radiol 30, 1156–1165 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06405-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06405-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation