Adult exposures from MDCT including multiphase studies: first Italian nationwide survey
- 665 Downloads
To evaluate the radiation dose in routine multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) examinations in Italian population.
This was a retrospective multicentre study included 5,668 patients from 65 radiology departments who had undergone common CT protocols: head, chest, abdomen, chest–abdomen–pelvis (CAP), spine and cardiac. Data included patient characteristics, CT parameters, volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) for each CT acquisition phase. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and a multi-regression analysis was used to outline the main factors affecting exposure.
The 75th percentiles of CTDIvol (mGy) and DLP (mGy cm) for whole head were 69 mGy and 1,312 mGy cm, respectively; for chest, 15 mGy and 569 mGy cm; spine, 42 mGy and 888 mGy cm; cardiac, 7 mGy and 131 mGy cm for calcium score, and 61 mGy and 1,208 mGy cm for angiographic CT studies. High variability was present in the DLP of abdomen and CAP protocols, where multiphase examinations dominated (71 % and 73 % respectively): for abdomen, 18 mGy, with 555 and 920 mGy cm in abdomen and abdomen–pelvis acquisitions respectively; for CAP, 17 mGy, with 508, 850 and 1,200 mGy cm in abdomen, abdomen–pelvis and CAP acquisitions respectively.
The results of this survey could help in the definition of updated diagnostic reference levels (DRL).
• Radiation dose associated with multidetector CT (MDCT) is an important health issue.
• This national survey assessed dose exposures of 5,668 patients undergoing MDCT.
• Dose indices correlate with BMI, voltage, rotation time, pitch and tube current.
• These results may contribute to an update of national diagnostic reference levels.
KeywordsNationwide survey Radiation protection Multidetector CT Patient dose Diagnostic reference levels
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Italian Society of Medical Physics
body mass index
volumetric computed tomography dose index
dose length product
diagnostic reference levels
electrocardiographically controlled tube current modulation
field of view
generalized estimating equations
multidetector computed tomography
radiology information system
Italian Society of Radiology
We are pleased to acknowledge the collaboration of numerous radiologist colleagues and medical physicists (listed in the Appendix) that has allowed the achievement of this large-scale data collection. We are also grateful to the Italian Society of Radiology (SIRM) who financed and supported the study, and to the Italian Society of Medical Physics (AIFM), for its active collaboration.
- 1.European Commission (1999) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. EUR 16262 EN. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European CommunitiesGoogle Scholar
- 2.Bongartz G, Golding SJ, JuriK AG, Leonardi M et al (2008) Quality criteria for multislice computed tomography. Results from a European concerned action on CT (FIGM-CT-2000-2008) Appendix B: European field survey on MDCT 2004. http://MDCT.eu/CT_Quality_Criteria.htm. Accessed 1 Jan 2013
- 5.Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST et al (2010) Low-tubevoltage, high-tube-current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm–initial clinical experience. Radiology 254:145–153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Decreto Legislativo 26 maggio 2000, n. 187. Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 157 del 7 luglio 2000Google Scholar
- 13.Origgi D, Vigorito S, Villa G, Bellomi M, Tosi G (2006) Survey of computed tomography techniques and absorbed dose in Italian hospitals: a comparison between two methods to estimate the dose-length product and the effective dose and verify fulfillment of the diagnostic reference levels. Eur Radiol 16:227–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Galanski M, Nagel HD, Stamm NG (2006) Paediatric CT exposure practise in the Federal Republic of Germany. Result of a nation-wide survey in 2005-2006. Medizinische Hochschule Hannover. http://www.mhhannover.de/fileadmin/kliniken/diagnostische_radiologie/download/Report_German_Paed-CT-Survey_2005_06.pdf. Accessed 1 Jan 2013
- 25.Roch P, Aubert B (2012) French diagnostic reference levels in diagnostic radiology, computed tomography and nuclear medicine. Radiat Prot Dosim 1–24Google Scholar
- 26.Veit R, Guggenberger R, Noßke D, Brix G (2010) Diagnostische Referenzwerte für Röntgenuntersuchungen Radiologe 50:907–912Google Scholar
- 27.SIRM SAGO (2010) Censimento Nazionale delle risorse umane e tecnologiche dell’area radiologica. Il Ragiologo Suppl 2:3–39Google Scholar
- 28.IMV (2007) Benchmark report CT 2007. IMV Medical Information Division, Illinois USGoogle Scholar
- 31.Istat (2011) Indagine annuale "Aspetti della vita quotidiana" 2011. www.istat.it. Accessed 1 Jan 2013
- 32.International Commission on Radiological Protection (2008) 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological. Annals of the ICRP, ICRP Publication 103. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 33.Andoh H, McNulty NJ, Lewis PJ (2013) Improving accuracy in reporting CT scans of oncology patients: assessing the effect of education and feedback interventions on the application of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Acad Radiol 20:351–357. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2012.12.002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Frost & Sullivan (2012) Analysis of the US medical computed tomography (CT) imaging system market. www.healthcare.frost.com. Accessed 1 Jan 2013
- 36.DDM2 (2011) www.ddmed.eu. Accessed 1 Jan 2013