System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part I. Optimization model

Radiology

Volumn 269, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 167-176

  Larson, David B ^a   Wang, Lily L ^a   Podberesky, Daniel J ^a   Goske, Marilyn J ^a  

^a CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROL SYSTEM; DOSE RESPONSE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING PHANTOM; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NOISE MEASUREMENT; PELVIS RADIOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; VALIDATION PROCESS; WATER EQUIVALENT DIAMETER;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84884692568     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13122320     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Smith-Bindman R. Is computed tomography safe? N Engl J Med 2010;363(1):1-4.
2. Brenner DJ, Hricak H. Radiation exposure from medical imaging: time to regulate? JAMA 2010;304(2):208-209.
3. Bogdanich W. Radiation boom. The New York Times Web site. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/us/series/radiation-boom/index.html. Accessed October 6, 2012.
4. 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)
5. Initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging. Food and Drug Administration Web site. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Radiation- EmittingProducts/ RadiationSafety/RadiationDoseReduction/UCM200087.pdf. Published February 2010. Accessed October 6, 2012.
6. Boone JM, Hendee WR, McNitt-Gray MF, Seltzer SE. Radiation exposure from CT scans: how to close our knowledge gaps, monitor and safeguard exposure - proceedings and recommendations of the Radiation Dose Summit, sponsored by NIBIB, February 24-25, 2011. Radiology 2012;265(2):544-554.
7. Goske MJ, Strauss KJ, Coombs LP, et al. Diagnostic reference ranges for pediatric abdominal CT. Radiology 2013;268(1):208-218. doi:10.1148/radiol. 13120730. Published March 19, 2013. Accessed April 1, 2013.
8. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233(3):649-657.
9. Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, et al. Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multidetector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 2005;237(1):213-223. (Pubitemid 41346166)
10. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230(3):619-628. (Pubitemid 38252854)
11. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. RadioGraphics 2006;26(2):503-512. (Pubitemid 43515321)
12. Tamm EP, Rong XJ, Cody DD, Ernst RD, Fitzgerald NE, Kundra V. Quality initiatives: CT radiation dose reduction - how to implement change without sacrificing diagnostic quality. RadioGraphics 2011;31(7):1823-1832.
13. Cook TS, Zimmerman SL, Steingall SR, Maidment ADA, Kim W, Boonn WW. RADIANCE: an automated, enterprise-wide solution for archiving and reporting CT radiation dose estimates. RadioGraphics 2011; 31(7):1833-1846.
14. Allen B Jr, Levin DC, Brant-Zawadzki M, Lexa FJ, Duszak R Jr. ACR white paper: strategies for radiologists in the era of health care reform and accountable care organizations - a report from the ACR Future Trends Committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2011; 8(5):309-317.
15. Dose index registry. American College of Radiology Web site. https://nrdr.acr.org/ Portal/DIR/Main/AboutDIR/page.aspx. Accessed January 7, 2013.
16. Robinson TJ, Robinson JD, Kanal KM. Implementation of the ACR dose index registry at a large academic institution: early experience. J Digit Imaging 2013;26(2):309-315.
17. Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF. Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176(2):297-301. (Pubitemid 32105629)
18. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009;301(5): 500-507.
19. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(22):2078-2086.
20. Golding SJ. Radiation exposure in CT: what is the professionally responsible approach? Radiology 2010;255(3):683-686.
21. Kanal KM, Vavilala MS, Raelson C, et al. Variation in pediatric head CT imaging protocols in Washington state. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(4):242-250.
22. Calvert C, Strauss KJ, Mooney DP. Variation in computed tomography radiation dose in community hospitals. J Pediatr Surg 2012;47(6):1167-1169.
23. Larson DB, Malarik RJ, Hall SM, Podberesky DJ. System for verifiable CT radiation dose optimization based on image quality. Part II. Process control system. Radiology 2013;269(1)177-185.
24. Nocedal J, Wright SJ. Introduction. In: Numerical optimization. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer, 2006; 1-9.
25. Albright SC, Winston WL. Introduction to optimization modeling. In: Practical management science. 4th ed. Mason, Ohio: South-Western, Cengage Learning, 2012; 67-132.
26. Menke J. Comparison of different body size parameters for individual dose adaptation in body CT of adults. Radiology 2005; 236(2):565-571. (Pubitemid 41023441)
27. Li B, Behrman RH, Norbash AM. Comparison of topogram-based body size indices for CT dose consideration and scan protocol optimization. Med Phys 2012;39(6):3456-3465.
28. Schlossmacher EJ. An iterative technique for absolute deviations curve fitting. J Am Stat Assoc 1973;68(344):857-859.
29. Wilting JE, Zwartkruis A, van Leeuwen MS, Timmer J, Kamphuis AG, Feldberg M. A rational approach to dose reduction in CT: individualized scan protocols. Eur Radiol 2001; 11(12):2627-2632. (Pubitemid 33114928)
30. Brisse HJ, Brenot J, Pierrat N, et al. The relevance of image quality indices for dose optimization in abdominal multi-detector row CT in children: experimental assessment with pediatric phantoms. Phys Med Biol 2009;54(7):1871-1892.
31. Standards for protection against radiation - Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Final rule. Federal Register 1991;56:23360-23474.
32. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Reference levels and achievable doses in medical and dental imaging: recommendations for the United States. National Council on Radiation Protection report no. 172. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2012.
33. Mahesh M. Strategies to reduce radiation dose in CT. In: MDCT physics: the basics. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009; 115-143.
34. Seibert JA. X-ray imaging physics for nuclear medicine technologists. I. Basic principles of x-ray production. J Nucl Med Technol 2004;32(3):139-147. (Pubitemid 47618968)
35. Hubbell J, Seltzer S. Tables of x-ray mass attenuation coefficients and mass energy-absorption coefficients from 1 keV to 20 MeV for elements Z = 1 to 92 and 48 additional substances of dosimetric interest. National Institute of Standards and Technology Web site. http://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/ XrayMassCoef/ComTab/water.html. Published May 1996. Updated July 2004. Accessed October 6, 2012.
36. Boone J, Strauss KJ, Cody DD, McCollough CH, McNitt-Gray MF, Toth TL. Sizespecific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. AAPM report no. 204. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT-204.pdf. Published 2011. Accessed October 6, 2012.
37. Gies M, Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C. Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. I. Simulation studies. Med Phys 1999;26(11):2235-2247.
38. Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C. Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. II. Phantom measurements. Med Phys 1999;26(11):2248-2253.
39. Shrimpton PC, Wall BF. Reference doses for paediatric computed tomography. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2000;90(1-2):249-252.
40. 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.
41. McCollough CH. Diagnostic reference levels. Image wisely, Radiation safety in adult medical imaging. http://www.imagewisely.org/Imaging- Professionals/Medical-Physicists/Articles/Diagnostic-Reference-Levels.aspx?CSRT= 7835180669728907586. Published 2010. Accessed October 6, 2012.
42. Bankier AA, Kressel HY. Through the looking glass revisited: the need for more meaning and less drama in the reporting of dose and dose reduction in CT. Radiology 2012;265(1):4-8.
43. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257(2):373-383.