Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 695–705 | Cite as

Radiation dose from multidetector CT studies in children: results from the first Italian nationwide survey

  • Claudio GranataEmail author
  • Daniela Origgi
  • Federica Palorini
  • Domenica Matranga
  • Sergio Salerno
Original Article



Multidetector CT (MDCT) scanners have contributed to the widespread use of CT in paediatric imaging. However, concerns are raised for the associated radiation exposure. Very few surveys on radiation exposure from MDCT studies in children are available.


The aim of this study was to outline the status of radiation exposure in children from MDCT practice in Italy.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective multicentre study we asked Italian radiology units with an MDCT scanner with at least 16 slices to provide dosimetric and acquisition parameters of CT examinations in three age groups (1–5, 6–10, 11–15 years) for studies of head, chest and abdomen. The dosimetric results were reported in terms of third-quartile volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) (mGy), size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) (mGy), dose length product (DLP) (mGy cm), and total DLP for multiphase studies. These results were compared with paediatric European and adult Italian published data. A multivariate analysis assessed the association of CTDIvol with patient characteristics and scanning modalities.


We collected data from 993 MDCT examinations performed at 25 centres. For age groups 1–5 years, 6–10 years and 11–15 years, the CTDIvol, DLP and total DLP values were statistically significantly below the values observed in our analogous national survey in adults, although the difference decreased with increasing age. CTDIvol variability among centres was statistically significant (variance = 0.07; 95% confidence interval = 0.03–0.16; P < 0.001).


This study reviewed practice in Italian centres performing paediatric imaging with MDCT scanners. The variability of doses among centres suggests that the use of standardised CT protocols should be encouraged.


Multidetector computed tomography Dose Diagnostic reference level Child 



This study was funded by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM). We thank all the radiologists and medical physicists of the following participating Centers: Ospedale di Bressanone, Bressanone; Ospedale Sacco, Milano; Ospedale Infantile Cesare Arrigo, Alessandria; Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milano; Ospedale San Giovanni di Dio, Salerno; Ospedale Maggiore di Schio-Thiene; Ospedale Santissima Annunziata, Imperia; Ospedale Policlinico Universitario, Messina; Ospedale Umberto Parini, Aosta; Istituti Ospitalieri, Cremona; Ospedale San Donato, Arezzo; Ospedale Carlo Poma, Mantova; Ospedale Niguarda, Milano; Ospedale Santa Maria della Misericordia, Perugia; Ospedale Pediatrico Meyer, Firenze; Ospedale Spirito Santo, Pescara; Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Città del Vaticano; Ospedale San Gerardo, Monza; Policlinico Universitario, Palermo; Ospedali Regina Margherita e Sant’Anna, Torino; Ospedale Pediatrico Burlo Garofalo, Trieste; Ospedali Riuniti Umberto I e Salesi, Ancona; Ospedale Pediatrico Giannina Gaslini, Genova

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J et al (2008) The ‘Image Gently’ campaign: increasing CT radiation dose awareness through a national education and awareness program. Pediatr Radiol 38:265–269Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tsushima Y, Taketomi-Takahashi A, Takei H et al (2010) Radiation exposure from CT examination in Japan. BMC Med Imaging 10:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aroura A, Bouchud FO, Valley J-F et al (2007) Number of x-ray examinations performed on paediatric and geriatric patients compared with adult patients. Radiat Protect Dosim 123:402–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galanski M, Nagal HD, Stamm G (2007) Pediatric CT exposure practice in the federal Republic of Germany. Results of a nationwide survey in 2005/6. Medizinishe Hochschule Hannover. Accessed 27 Jan 2013
  5. 5.
    National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP) (2007) Report No. 160. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Accessed 27 Oct 2014
  6. 6.
    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 380:499–505CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z et al (2013) Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. Br Med J 346:f2360–2378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boone JM, Strauss KJ, Cody DD et al (2011) AAPM report No. 204: size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. Accessed 11 Nov 2013
  9. 9.
    Teunen D (1998) European directive on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure (97/43/EURATOM). J Radiol Prot 18:133–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    European Commission (2012) Council directive laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation. Accessed 24 Oct 2013
  11. 11.
    Decreto Legislativo 26 maggio 2000, n.187. Attuazione della direttiva 97/43/Euratom in materia di protezione sanitaria delle persone contro i pericoli delle radiazioni ionizzanti connesse ad esposizioni mediche (Legislative Decree n.187 of May 26, 2000. Implementation of 97/43/Euratom directive on individual health protection against ionizing radiations due to medical exposure). Gazzetta Ufficiale n.157 del 7 luglio 2000, suppl. ordinario n.105. Accessed 7 Oct 2014
  12. 12.
    Società Italiana di Radiologia Medica (SIRM) [Italian Society of Medical Radiology], Società di Ricerca per l’Organizzazione Sanitaria (Research Society for Health Care Organization)(2010) Censimento Nazionale delle risorse umane e tecnologiche dell’area radiologica (National Survey of human and technological resources of the radiological area) Il Radiologo s2:3–39Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    (2013) Market research CT products overview. IMV CT benchmark report. Accessed 3 Oct 2013
  14. 14.
    Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG et al. (1998) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography (EUR16262). Accessed 27 Sept 2014
  15. 15.
    Palorini F, Origgi D, Granata C et al (2014) Adult exposure from MDCT including multiphase studies: first Italian nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 24:469–483Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA et al (2006) National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol 79:968–980CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Verdun FR, Gutierrez D, Vader JP et al (2008) CT radiation dose in children: a survey to establish age-based diagnostic reference levels in Switzerland. Eur Radiol 18:1980–1986CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brisse HJ, Aubert B (2009) CT exposure from pediatric MDCT: results from the 2007–2008 SFIPP/ISRN survey. J Radiol 90:207–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yakoumakis E, Karlatira M, Gialousis G et al (2009) Effective dose variation in pediatric computed tomography: dose reference levels in Greece. Health Phys 97:595–603CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dose Datamed 2, DDM2 (2013) Study on European population doses from medical exposure. Supplement to DDM2 project report: diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in Europe. Accessed 27 Oct 2013
  21. 21.
    Goske MJ, Strauss KJ, Coombs LP et al (2013) Diagnostic reference ranges for pediatric abdominal CT. Radiology 268:208–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kleinman PL, Strauss KJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Patient size measured on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children’s hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1611–1619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rizzo S, Kalra M, Schmidt B et al (2006) Comparison of angular and combined automatic tube current modulation techniques with constant tube current CT of the abdomen and pelvis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:673–679CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Damilakis J (2008) Automatic exposure control in paediatric and adult multidetector CT examinations: a phantom study on dose reduction and image quality. Med Phys 35:4567–4576CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M et al (2005) Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 237:213–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sutton DG, McVey S, Gentle D et al (2014) CT chest abdomen pelvis doses in Scotland: has the DRL had its day? Br J Radiol 87:20140157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudio Granata
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daniela Origgi
    • 2
  • Federica Palorini
    • 2
  • Domenica Matranga
    • 3
  • Sergio Salerno
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyIRCCS Istituto Giannina GasliniGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Medical PhysicsIstituto Europeo di OncologiaMilanItaly
  3. 3.Department of Sciences for Health Promotion and Mother and Child Care “G. D’Alessandro”University of PalermoPalermoItaly
  4. 4.Department of Medical and Forensic Biopathology and Biotechnologies, Section of RadiologyUniversity of PalermoPalermoItaly

Personalised recommendations