Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk for pediatric chest CT

Radiology

Volumn 259, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 862-874

  Li, Xiang ^a   Samei, Ehsan ^a   Segars, W Paul ^a   Sturgeon, Gregory M ^a   Colsher, James G ^a   Frush, Donald P ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER RISK; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER MODEL; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DOSE RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFANT; MALE; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SCHOOL CHILD;

ADOLESCENT; BODY SIZE; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; MODELS, ANATOMIC; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK; THORACIC NEOPLASMS; THORAX; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 79956332692     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.11101900     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Linton OW, Mettler FA Jr. National conference on dose reduction in CT, with an emphasis on pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(2):321-329. (Pubitemid 36909472)
2. Arch ME, Frush DP. Pediatric body MDCT: a 5-year follow-up survey of scanning parameters used by pediatric radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(2):611-617.
3. Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, Berdon W. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176(2):289-296. (Pubitemid 32105628)
4. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357(22):2277-2284. (Pubitemid 350190758)
5. Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, et al. The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190(2):273-274. (Pubitemid 351196594)
6. Cody DD, Moxley DM, Krugh KT, O'Daniel JC, Wagner LK, Eftekhari F. Strategies for formulating appropriate MDCT techniques when imaging the chest, abdomen, and pelvis in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182(4):849-859. (Pubitemid 38391642)
7. Cristy M, Eckerman KF. Specific absorbed fractions of energy at various ages from internal photon sources. ORNL/TM-8381/Vol I-VII. Oak Ridge, Tenn: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1987.
8. Lee C, Lodwick D, Hurtado J, Pafundi D, Williams JL, Bolch WE. The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 2010;55(2):339-363.
9. Shrimpton PC. Assessment of patient dose in CT. NRPB-PE/1/2004 NRPB. Chilton, England: National Radiological Protection Board, 2004.
10. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M. National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol 2006;79(948):968-980. [Published correction appears in Br J Radiol 2007;80(956):685.]
11. Huda W, Ogden KM. Computing effective doses to pediatric patients undergoing body CT examinations. Pediatr Radiol 2008;38(4):415-423.
12. Thomas KE, Wang B. Age-specific effective doses for pediatric MSCT examinations at a large children's hospital using DLP conversion coefficients: a simple estimation method. Pediatr Radiol 2008;38(6):645-656.
13. Boone JM, Geraghty EM, Seibert JA, Wootton-Gorges SL. Dose reduction in pediatric CT: a rational approach. Radiology 2003;228(2):352-360. (Pubitemid 36910072)
14. Nickoloff EL, Dutta AK, Lu ZF. Influence of phantom diameter, kVp and scan mode upon computed tomography dose index. Med Phys 2003;30(3):395-402. (Pubitemid 36337106)
15. Siegel MJ, Schmidt B, Bradley D, Suess C, Hildebolt C. Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 2004;233(2):515-522. (Pubitemid 39423813)
16. Huda W, Atherton JV, Ware DE, Cumming WA. An approach for the estimation of effective radiation dose at CT in pediatric patients. Radiology 1997;203(2):417-422. (Pubitemid 27176214)
17. Sturgeon GM, Li X, Mendonca S, Frush DP, Samei E, Segars WP. Series of anatomically detailed NURBS-based phantoms for pediatric CT research. Med Phys(in press).
18. Segars WP, Tsui BMW, Frey EC, Fishman EK. Extension of the 4D NCAT phantom to dynamic x-ray CT simulation. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec (2003) 2003;5 :3195-3199. (Pubitemid 40100081)
19. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection: reference values. ICRP Publication 89. New York, NY: International Commission on Radiological Protection, 2002.
20. International Commission on Radiological Protection. The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Essen, Germany: International Commission on Radiological Protection, 2007.
21. Li X, Samei E, Segars WP, et al. Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT. I. Development and validation of a Monte Carlo program. Med Phys 2011;38(1):397-407.
22. Li X, Samei E, Segars WP, et al. Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT. II. Application to patients. Med Phys 2011;38(1):408-419.
23. van der Molen AJ, Geleijns J. Overranging in multisection CT: quantification and relative contribution to dose - comparison of four 16-section CT scanners. Radiology 2007;242(1):208-216. (Pubitemid 44956026)
24. Brenner DJ. Effective dose:a flawed concept that could and should be replaced. Br J Radiol 2008;81(967):521-523. (Pubitemid 351957735)
25. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006.
26. vol to account for differences between scanners. Med Phys 2010;37(4):1816-1825.
27. Huda W, Ogden KM, Khorasani MR. Converting dose-length product to effective dose at CT. Radiology 2008;248(3):995-1003.
28. van Straten M, Deak P, Shrimpton PC, Kalender WA. The effect of angular and longitudinal tube current modulations on the estimation of organ and effective doses in x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 2009;36(11):4881-4889.
29. Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 6th ed. Belmont, Calif: Thomson-Brooks/Cole, 2006.
30. Kleinman PL, Strauss KJ, Zurakowski D, Buckley KS, Taylor GA. Patient size measured on CT images as a function of age at a tertiary care children's hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(6):1611-1619.
31. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. AAPM Report No 96. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008.
32. Deak PD, Langner O, Lell M, Kalender WA. Effects of adaptive section collimation on patient radiation dose in multisection spiral CT. Radiology 2009;252(1):140-147.
33. Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Estimating effective dose for CT using doselength product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting International Commission on Radiological Protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(4):881-889.
34. Lee C, Lee C, Staton RJ, et al. Organ and effective doses in pediatric patients undergoing helical multislice computed tomography examination. Med Phys 2007;34(5):1858-1873. (Pubitemid 46671369)
35. Haaga JR, Miraldi F, MacIntyre W, LiPuma JP, Bryan PJ, Wiesen E. The effect of mAs variation upon computed tomography image quality as evaluated by in vivo and in vitro studies. Radiology 1981;138(2):449-454. (Pubitemid 11179610)
36. Haaga JR. Radiation dose management: weighing risk versus benefit. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(2):289-291. (Pubitemid 32660480)
37. Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4(5):272-284. (Pubitemid 46671375)
38. IAEA radiation protection of patients. IAEA smart card/smartrad track project. International Atomic Energy Agency. http://rpop.iaea.org/RPOP/RPoP/ Content/News/smartcard-project.htm. Accessed September 2010.
39. 100. Med Phys 2007;34(4):1364-1371.