Clinical Expansion of CT and Radiation Dose

  • Stuart Meeson
  • Rajesh Patel
  • Stephen Golding
Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)


The principles of protecting the patient undergoing clinical investigation using radiation are clear and well established: it is the responsibility of all radiological services to ensure the information required for the clinical management of the patient is obtained with the lowest practicable exposure to radiation. Within this clear objective, however, medical investigation operates in a constantly changing scenario influenced by increasing knowledge of disease processes and advancing technological development. This syndrome ensures that as time passes differing objectives and concerns come to the fore. With the now widespread adoption of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), for a broad range of examinations, MDCT continues to be the dominant source of dose from medical X-ray examinations, thereby posing significant challenges in radiological protection to the extent that some now claim that this represents today’s greatest single challenge in radiation protection in diagnostic use. This book expounds the challenges posed by MDCT to scientists and physicians and in this chapter we provide an introduction to the main themes which are of concern.


Compute Tomography Compute Tomography Examination Radiation Protection Compute Tomography Colonography Tube Current Modulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. AAPM Dose Check Guidelines (2011) Version1.0, 04/27/2011. Available from:
  2. Abul-Kasim K, Strömbeck A, Sahlstrand-Johnson P (2011) Low-dose computed tomography of the paranasal sinuses: radiation doses and reliability analysis. Am J Otolaryngol 32(1):47–51 [Epub 2009 Oct 12]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) (2011) AAPM Government Affairs. Available from
  4. Anderson K, Cowan NC (2004) Multidetector CT urography. Radiol Now 21:4–6Google Scholar
  5. Benjamin MS, Drucker EA, McLoud TC, Shepherd J (2003) Small pulmonary nodules: detection at chest CT and outcome. Radiology 226:489–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berland LL, Smith JK (1998) Multidetector-array CT: once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology 209:327–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. BMU (1996) (Bundesministerium fur Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicher-heit). Umweltradioaktivitat und Strahlenbelastung im Jahre. Deutscher Bundestag 13. Wahlperiode; Drucksache 13/8630Google Scholar
  8. Brix G, Nagel HD, Stamm G et al (2003) Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 13:1979–1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caramella D, Bartolozzi C (eds) (2002) 3D image processing: techniques and applications. Springer, BrelinGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohnen M, Fischer H, Hamacher J et al (2000) CT of the head by use of reduced current and kilovoltage: relationship between image quality and dose reduction. Am J Neuradiol 21(1654):1660Google Scholar
  11. Computed Tomography Dose Check (NEMA Standards Publication XR 25-2010) (2010)
  12. European Commission (2000) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. EUR 16262EN. EC, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  13. European Commission (2004) MSCT quality criteria. European guidelines for multislice computed tomography. Contract number FIGM-CT2000-20078-CT-TIP. Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG, Leonardi M, van Persijn van Meerten E, Rodríguez R, Schneider K, Calzado A, Geleijns J, Jessen KA, Panzer W, Shrimpton PC, Tosi G. Available from
  14. European commission (2008) Safety and efficacy of computed tomography: a broad perspective (CT safety and efficacy). European commission Euratom research and training programme on nuclear energy (area: radiation protection) report. Contract FI6R-CT2004-002388. Geleijns J (Koos), Kalender W, Krispijn W, Schneider K, Shrimpton P. Available from
  15. Garney CJ, Hanlon R (2002) Computed tomography in clinical practice. BMJ 324:1077–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gervaise A, Osemont B, Lecocq S, Noel A, Micard E, Felblinger J, Blum A (2011) CT image quality improvement using adaptive iterative dose reduction with wide-volume acquisition on 320-detector CT. Eur Radiol 17 Sep 2011 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  17. Golding SJ, Shrimpton PC (2002) Radiation dose in CT: are we meeting the challenge? Br J Radiol 75:1–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hart D, Wall BF, Hillier MC, Shrimpton PC (2010) Frequency and collective dose for medical and dental X-ray examinations in the UK, 2008. Chilton HPA-CRCE-012, 2010. Available from
  19. Henzler T, Barraza JM Jr, Nance JW Jr, Costello P, Krissak R, Fink C, Schoepf UJ (2011) CT imaging of acute pulmonary embolism. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 5(1):3–11 [Epub 29 Oct 2010]Google Scholar
  20. Hounsfield GN (1973) Computerised transverse axial scanning (tomography). Br J Radiol 46:1016PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hu H, He HD, Foley WD, Fox SH (2000) Four multidetector-row helical CT: image quality and volume coverage speed. Radiology 215:55–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C et al (2003) Feasibility of ultra-low dose multislice CT colography for the detection of colorectal lesions: preliminary experience. Eur Radiol 13:1297–1302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Ichikawa T, Erturk SM, Araki T (2006) Multiphasic contrast-enhanced multidetector-row CT of liver: contrast-enhancement theory and practical scan protocol with a combination of fixed injection duration and patients’ body-weight-tailored dose of contrast material. Eur J Radiol 58(2):165–176 [Epub 18 Jan 2006]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Irie T, Kajitani M, Itai Y (2001) CT fluoroscopy-guided intervention: marked reduction of scattered radiation dose to the physicians hand by use of a lead plate and an improved I–I device. J Vasc Interv Radiol 12:1417–1421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson A, Whitehouse RW (1993) Low-dose computed tomographic imaging in orbital trauma. Br J Radiol 66:655–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnson CD (2001) Pancreatic carcinoma: developing a protocol for multidetector row CT. Radiology 220:3–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kalendar W (2004) Dose management in multislice spiral computed tomography. Eur Radiol Syllabus 14:40–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kalender WA (2000) Computed tomography, Publicis MCD Verlag, MunichGoogle Scholar
  29. Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock P (1990) Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and continuous scanner rotation. Radiology 176:181–183PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kalra KM, Maher M, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation. Radiology 233:649–657PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kawashima A, Vrtiska TJ, LeRoy AJ et al (2004) CT urography. RadioGr 24:S35–S54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kröpil P, Cohnen M, Andersen K, Heinen W, Stegmann V, Mödder U (2010) Image quality in multidetector CT of paranasal sinuses: potential of dose reduction using an adaptive post-processing filter. Rofo 182(11):973–978 [Epub 18 Aug 2010. German]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Landeras LA, Aslam R, Yee J (2007) Virtual colonoscopy: technique and accuracy. Radiol Clin North Am 45(2):333–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU et al (2004) Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology 233:139–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lederlin M, Thambo JB, Latrabe V, Corneloup O, Cochet H, Montaudon M, Laurent F (2011) Coronary imaging techniques with emphasis on CT and MRI. Pediatr Radiol 41(12):1516–1525 [Epub 30 Nov 2011]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lehmkuhl L, Gosch D, Nagel HD, Stumpp P, Kahn T, Gutberlet M (2010) Quantification of radiation dose savings in cardiac computed tomography using prospectively triggered mode and ECG pulsing: a phantom study. Eur Radiol 20(9):2116–2125 [Epub 9 Apr 2010]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewis MA, Edyvean S (2005) Patient dose reduction in CT. Br J Radiol 78:880–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Makayama Y, Yamashita Y and Takahahi M (2001) CT of the aorta and its major branches. In: Multislice CT. Reiser M, Takahashi M, Modic M and Bruening R (eds) Multislice CT, Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  39. Mayo JR (1997) Opinion response to acute pulmonary embolism: the role of computed tomographic imaging. J Thoracic Imaging 12:95–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meeson S, Alvey CM, Golding SJ (2009) Justifying multidetector CT in abdominal sepsis: time for review? Br J Radiol 82:190–197 [Epub 27 Oct 2008]PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meeson S, Shrimpton PC, MacLachlan SA, Golding SJ (2011) Update on radiation exposure from CT: early progress in the third UK CT dose survey. In: (e103) Proceedings of UK radiological congress 2011, BJR Congress Series, pp 55–56Google Scholar
  42. Mettler FA, Wiest PW, Locken JA, Kelsey CA (2000) CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot 20:353–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mini RL, Vock P, Mury R, Schneeberger PP (1995) Radiation exposure of patients who undergo CT of the Trunk. Radiology 195:557–562PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Morhard D, Fink C, Graser A, Reiser MF, Becker C, Johnson TR (2009) Cervical and cranial computed tomographic angiography with automated bone removal: dual energy computed tomography versus standard computed tomography. Invest Radiol 44(5):293–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mori S, Endo M, Nishizawa K et al (2006) Comparison of patient doses in 256-slice CT and 16-slice CT scanners. Br J Radiol 79:56–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512 (review)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. NCRP (2009) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. NCRP report 160. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  48. Nicholson R, Fetherston S (2002) Primary radiation outside the imaged volume. Br J Radiol 75:518–522PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Olerud HM (1997) Analysis of factors influencing patient doses from CT in Norway. Radiat Prot Dosim 71:123–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Olerud HM, Obberg S, Widmark A, Hauser M (2002) Physician and patient radiation dose in various CT guided biopsy protocols. In: Sixth European ALARA network on “occupational exposure optimisation in the medical field and radiopharmaceutical industry”. Madrid, Spain, 23–25 Oct 2002Google Scholar
  51. Poll LW, Cohnen M, Brachten S, Ewen K, Modder U (2002) Dose reduction in multi-slice CT of the heart by use of ECG-controlled tube current modulation (“ECG pulsing”): phantom measurements. Rofo 174:1500–1505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Prokop (2005) New challenges in MDCT. Eur Radiol 15(suppl 5):E35–E45Google Scholar
  53. Raptopoulos V, Katson G, Rosen P et al (2003) Acute appendicitis: effect of increased use of CT on selecting patients earlier. Radiology 226:521–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rathburn SW, Raskob GE, Whitsett TL (2000) Sensitivity and specificity of helical computed tomography in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a systematic review. Ann Int Med 132:227–232Google Scholar
  55. Scheck RJ, Coppenrath EM, Kellner MW et al (1998) Radiation dose and image quality in spiral computed tomography: multicentre evaluation at six institutions. Br J Radiol 71:734–744PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Semelka RC (2005) Radiation risks from CT scans: a call for patient-focused imaging. Medscape Radiol 6(1)
  57. Shrimpton PC, Edyvean S (1998) CT scanner dosimetry. Br J Radiol 71:1–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M (2005) Doses from computed tomography (CT). Examinations in the UK—2003 Review. NRPB-W67Google Scholar
  59. Shrimpton PC, Jones DG, Hillier MC et al (1991) Survey of CT practice in the UK. Part 2: dosimetric aspects. NRPB Report R249. NRPB, ChiltonGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith A, Shah GA, Kron T (1998) Variation of patient dose in head CT. Br J Radiol 71:1296–1301PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith RC, Verga M, McCarthy S, Rosenfield AT (1996) Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT. Am J Roentgenol 166:97–101Google Scholar
  62. Starck G, Lonn L, Cederblad A et al (1998) Radiation dose reduction in CT: application to tissue area and volume determination. Radiology 209:397–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Summers RM (2010) Polyp size measurement at CT colonography: what do we know and what do we need to know? Radiology 255(3):707–720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Theocharopoulos N, Chatzakis G, Damilakis J (2009) Is radiography justified for the evaluation of patients presenting with cervical spine trauma? Med Phys 36(10):4461–4470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (2000) Sources and effects of ionising radiation, vol 1. UNSCEAR, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  66. UNSCEAR (2010) United Nations scientific committee on the effects of atomic radiation 2008 report: sources and effects of ionizing radiation, vol 1. Annex A: Medical radiation exposures. Available from
  67. Vining DJ (1997) Virtual colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Amer 7:285–291Google Scholar
  68. Wells ES et al (1998) Use of a clinical model for safe management of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Ann Intern Med 129:997–1005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Wittram C, Maher MM, Yoo AJ et al (2004) CT angiography of pulmonary embolism: diagnosis criteria and causes of misdiagnosis. RadioGraphics 24:1219–1238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yates SJ, Pike LC, Goldstone KE (2004a) Effect of multislice scanners on patient dose from routine CT examinations in East Anglia. Br J Radiol 77:472–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yates SJ, Pike LC, Golstone KE (2004b) Effect of multislice scanners on patient dose from routine CT examinations in East Anglia. Br J Radiol 77:472–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zoetelief J, Geleijns J (1998) Patient dose in spiral CT. Br J Radiol 71:584–586PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Radiology Group, Nuffield Department of Surgical SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations