Advertisement

The Influence of Pitch Factor in Reducing Computed Tomography Head Dose Exposure: Single–Centre Trials

  • N. E. Ismail
  • F. Mahmood
  • M. K. A. Karim
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Bioengineering book series (LNBE)

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) is mainly associated with high radiation dose exposure to patient and potential for increased risk of cancer. The increasing number of CT head examinations worldwide shows the need for optimization and strategy for dose reduction technique. Thus, the aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of pitch factor in reducing CT dose particularly CT head examination. In this study, the scan acquisition parameter and the CT dose parametric information were collected retrospectively from 16-slice CT scanner (Toshiba Activion) console display. Effective dose (E) was estimated using effective dose per dose-length product (E/DLP) conversion factor, k = 0.0021 mSv/mGy.cm. This experiment involved two sets of study, the pre-intervention (n = 163, 58 ± 18 years, 120 kV, 200 mAs, pitch = 0.688) and post-intervention (n = 165, 57 ± 19 years, 120 kV, 200 mAs, pitch = 0.938) on January 2017 and March 2017, respectively. The mean CTDIvol values recorded for pre- and post-intervention were 70.00 ± 8.84 mGy and 51.30 ± 0.72 mGy, respectively. Generally, the mean E value for pre-intervention and post-intervention were 2.75 ± 0.35 mSv and 2.16 ± 0.17 mSv, respectively. It is interesting to note that by increasing the pitch factor in CT head examination has significantly reduced the CT head dose exposure without adversely affecting image quality. The mean DLP value for post-intervention is 1030.10 mGy.cm and has been set as institutional DRL. In conclusion, it is recommended for radiology personnel especially radiographer and radiologist to be aware certain acquisition parameters i.e. pitch factor that work for the optimization process.

References

  1. 1.
    Hricak H et al (2011) Managing radiation use in medical imaging: a multifaceted challenge. Radiol 258(3):889–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sodickson A (2013) Strategies for reducing radiation exposure from multidetector computed tomography in the acute care setting. Can Assoc Radiol J 64(2):119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kalra MK, Sodickson AD (2015) CT radiation: key concepts for gentle and wise use 1. 1706–1721Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McCollough CH (2008) AAPM Report No. 96 : the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Foley SJ, Mcentee MF, Rainford LA (2012) Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J RadiolGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin C, Mok GSP, Tsai M, Tsai W (2015) National survey of radiation dose and image quality in adult CT head scans in. 1–12Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Treier R, Aroua A, Verdun FR, Samara E, Stuessi A, Trueb PR (2010) Patient doses in CT examinations in Switzerland: implementation of national diagnostic reference levels. Radiat Prot DosimGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    ARPANSA (2012) National diagnostic reference level fact sheet. Aust Radiat Prot Nucl Saf Agency 1–10Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karim MKA et al (2016) Establishment of multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) reference level in Johor, Malaysia. J Phys Conf Ser 694Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malaysian Ministry of Health (2013) Malaysian diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging (radiology)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yonekura Y (2015) Diagnostic reference levels based on latest surveys in JapanGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyHospital KajangKajangMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyNational Cancer InstitutePutrajayaMalaysia

Personalised recommendations