How I do it: Managing radiation dose in CT

Radiology

Volumn 273, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 657-672

  Mayo Smith, William W ^a,e   Hara, Amy K ^b   Mahesh, Mahadevappa ^c   Sahani, Dushyant V ^d   Pavlicek, William ^b  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DOSE LENGTH PRODUCT; EFFECTIVE TUBE CURRENT TIME PRODUCT; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTION; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PATIENT EDUCATION; RADIATION ABSORPTION; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTION; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIATION MONITORING; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIATION SAFETY; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIZE SPECIFIC DOSE ESTIMATE; TUBE CURRENT MODULATION; TUBE CURRENT TIME PRODUCT; TUBE VOLTAGE; TUBE VOLTAGE MODIFICATION; VOLUME COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY DOSE INDEX; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; EDUCATION; NOMENCLATURE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SAFETY; PROCEDURES; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOLOGY; RADIOMETRY;

ALGORITHMS; HUMANS; PATIENT CARE TEAM; PATIENT SAFETY; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOLOGY; RADIOMETRY; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84916624353     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132328     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Rogers LF. Taking care of children: Check out the parameters used for helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176(2):287
2. Rogers LF. Radiation exposure in CT: why so high? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(2):277
3. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: An increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357(22):2277-2284
4. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. NCRP report no. 160. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2009
5. Brody J. Medical radiation soars, with risks often overlooked. New York Times. August 20, 2012:D7.http://well.blogs.nytimes. com/2012/08/20/medical-radiation-soarswith-risks-often-overlooked/
6. Redberg R, Smith-Bindman R. We are giving ourselves cancer. New York Times. January 31, 2014:A27.http://www.nytimes. com/2014/01/31/opinion/we-are-givingourselves-cancer.html?-r=0
7. White paper: Initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Web site.http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationSafety/RadiationDoseReduction/ucm199994.htm. Published February 16, 2010. Updated December 14, 2010
8. Sentinel event alert issue 47: Radiation risks of diagnostic imaging. Joint Commission Web site. http://www.jointcommission.org/sea-issue-47/. Published August 24 2011
9. Joint Commission announces new and revised diagnostic imaging standards. Joint Commission Web site. http://www.jointcommission.org/joint-commission-announces-new-and-revised-diagnostic-imaging-standards/. Published December 20 2013
10. Hricak H, Brenner DJ, Adelstein SJ, et al. Managing radiation use in medical imaging: A multifaceted challenge. Radiology 2011;258(3):889-905
11. Sodickson A. Strategies for reducing radiation exposure in multi-detector row CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2012;50(1):1-14
12. Amis ES Jr. CT radiation dose: Trending in the right direction. Radiology 2011;261(1):5-8
13. Amis ES Jr, Butler PF; American College of Radiology. ACR white paper on radiation dose in medicine: Three years later. J Am Coll Radiol 2010;7(11):865-870
14. McCollough CH, Chen GH, Kalender W, et al. Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: Report from the summit on management of radiation dose in CT. Radiology 2012;264(2):567-580
15. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: Overview of available options. RadioGraphics 2006;26(2):503-512
16. Coakley FV, Gould R, Yeh BM, Arenson RL. CT radiation dose: what can you do right now in your practice? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(3):619-625
17. Little MP, Wakeford R, Tawn EJ, Bouffler SD, Berrington de Gonzalez A. Risks associated with low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation: why linearity may be (almost) the best we can do. Radiology 2009;251(1):6-12
18. Tubiana M, Feinendegen LE, Yang C, Kaminski JM. The linear no-threshold re-lationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data. Radiology 2009;251(1):13-22
19. Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiation Research 2007;168(1): 1-64
20. National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press 2006
21. Muirhead CR, O'Hagan JA, Haylock RG, et al. Mortality and cancer incidence following occupational radiation exposure: Third analysis of the National Registry for Radiation Workers. British J Cancer 2009;100(1):206-12
22. Cohen BL. Cancer risk from low-level radiation. AJR Am J Roentgeno 2002;179(5): 1137-1143
23. 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
24. McCollough CH, Guimarães L, Fletcher JG. In defense of body CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193(1):28-39
25. Sierink JC, Saltzherr TP, Reitsma JB, Van Delden OM, Luitse JS, Goslings JC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of immediate total-body computed tomography compared with selective radiological imaging of injured patients. Br J Surg 2012;99(Suppl 1): 52-58
26. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, Mostafavi AA, McCabe CJ. Effect of computed tomography of the appendix on treatment of patients and use of hospital resources. N Engl J Med 1998;338(3):141-146
27. Jackson D, Earnshaw SR, Farkouh R, Schwamm L. Cost-effectiveness of CT perfusion for selecting patients for intravenous thrombolysis: A US hospital perspective. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31(9):1669-1674
28. Zondervan RL, Hahn PF, Sadow CA, Liu B, Lee SI. Body CT scanning in young adults: Examination indications, patient outcomes, and risk of radiation-induced cancer. Radiology 2013;267(2):460-469
29. 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
30. Smith-Bindman R. Is computed tomography safe? N Engl J Med 2010;363(1):1-4
31. Berrington de González A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(22):2071-2077
32. Durand DJ, Dixon RL, Morin RL. Utilization strategies for cumulative dose estimates: A review and rational assessment. J Am Coll Radiol 2012;9(7):480-485
33. Mahesh M, Durand DJ. The choosing wisely campaign and its potential impact on diagnostic radiation burden. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10(1):65-66
34. Birnbaum S. Radiation safety in the era of helical CT: A patient-based protection program currently in place in two community hospitals in New Hampshire. J Am Coll Radiol 2008;5(6):714-718, e5
35. ACR appropriateness criteria. American College of Radiology Web site.www.acr. org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria. Updated May 2014
36. The Royal College of Radiologists. RCR referral guidelines. Royal College of Radiologists Web site.http://www.rcr.ac.uk/content.aspx?PageID=995. Accessed January 13, 2014
37. Alliance for Radiation Safety in Pediatric Imaging. Image Gently Web site.http://www.pedrad.org/associations/5364/ig/
38. Joint Task Force on Adult Radiation Protection. Image Wisely Web site.http://www.imagewisely.org
39. ABIM Foundation. Choosing Wisely Web site.http://www.choosingwisely.org
40. Rosenthal DI, Weilburg JB, Schultz T, et al. Radiology order entry with decision support: Initial clinical experience. J Am Coll Radiol 2006;3(10):799-806
41. Sistrom CL, Dang PA, Weilburg JB, Dreyer KJ, Rosenthal DI, Thrall JH. Effect of computerized order entry with integrated decision support on the growth of outpatient procedure volumes: Seven-year time series analysis. Radiology 2009;251(1):147-155
42. Lu MT, Tellis WM, Fidelman N, Qayyum A, Avrin DE. Reducing the rate of repeat imaging: Import of outside images to PACS. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(3):628-634
43. Sodickson A, Opraseuth J, Ledbetter S. Outside imaging in emergency department transfer patients: CD import reduces rates of subsequent imaging utilization. Radiology 2011; 260(2):408-413
44. Singh S, Kalra MK, Thrall JH, Mahesh M. CT radiation dose reduction by modifying primary factors. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(5): 369-372
45. Huda W, Mettler FA. Volume CT dose index and dose-length product displayed during CT: what good are they? Radiology 2011; 258(1):236-242
46. Yu L, Li H, Fletcher JG, McCollough CH. Automatic selection of tube potential for radiation dose reduction in CT: A general strategy. Med Phys 2010;37(1):234-243
47. Winklehner A, Goetti R, Baumueller S, et al. Automated attenuation-based tube potential selection for thoracoabdominal computed tomography angiography: Improved dose effectiveness. Invest Radiol 2011;46(12): 767-773
48. Hough DM, Fletcher JG, Grant KL, et al. Lowering kilovoltage to reduce radiation dose in contrast-enhanced abdominal CT: Initial assessment of a prototype automated kilovoltage selection tool. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(5):1070-1077
49. Sahani DV, Kalva SP, Hahn PF, Saini S. 16-MDCT angiography in living kidney donors at various tube potentials: Impact on image quality and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188(1):115-120
50. Goetti R, Winklehner A, Gordic S, et al. Automated attenuation-based kilovoltage selection: Preliminary observations in patients after endovascular aneurysm repair of the abdominal aorta. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(3):W380-W385
51. Lee KH, Lee JM, Moon SK, et al. Attenuation-based automatic tube voltage selection and tube current modulation for dose reduction at contrast-enhanced liver CT. Radiology 2012;265(2):437-447
52. Mahesh M, Scatarige JC, Cooper J, Fishman EK. Dose and pitch relationship for a particular multislice CT scanner. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177(6):1273-1275
53. Beister M, Kolditz D, Kalender WA. Iterative reconstruction methods in X-ray CT. Phys Med 2012;28(2):94-108
54. Volders D, Bols A, Haspeslagh M, Coenegrachts K. Model-based iterative reconstruction and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT: Comparison of image quality in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Radiology 2013;269(2):469-474
55. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radia tion dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193(3):764-771
56. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34(11): 4526-4544
57. Kulkarni NM, Uppot RN, Eisner BH, Sahani DV. Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: How low can we go? Radiology 2012;265(1): 158-166
58. Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Tanami Y, et al. Model-based iterative reconstruction technique for ultralow-dose computed tomography of the lung: A pilot study. Invest Radiol 2012;47(8):482-489
59. Husarik DB, Marin D, Samei E, et al. Radiation dose reduction in abdominal computed tomography during the late hepatic arterial phase using a model-based iterative reconstruction algorithm: How low can we go? Invest Radiol 2012;47(8):468-474
60. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): Initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(6):1266-1274
61. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Cody DD, Boone JM, McNitt-Gray MF. CT dose index and patient dose: They are not the same thing. Radiology 2011;259(2):311-316
62. Computed tomography dose check: NEMA XR 25-2010. National Electrical Manufacturers Association Web site.http://www.nema.org/standards/Pages/Computed-Tomography-Dose-Check.aspx. Published October 1, 2010. Accessed December 23, 2013
63. Computed tomography accreditation. American College of Radiology Web site.http://http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Accreditation/CT. Updated November 18, 2013
64. Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: A catalog. Radiology 2008;248(1):254-263
65. McCollough CH, Christner JA, Kofler JM. How effective is effective dose as a predictor of radiation risk? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(4):890-896
66. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT. Task group 96. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008
67. Huda W, Ogden KM, Khorasani MR. Converting dose-length product to effective dose at CT. Radiology 2008;248(3):995-1003
68. Brink JA, Morin RL. Size-specific dose estimation for CT: How should it be used and what does it mean? Radiology 2012;265(3): 666-668
69. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. Task Group 204. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2011
70. Hara AK, Wellnitz CV, Paden RG, Pavlicek W, Sahani DV. Reducing body CT radiation dose: beyond just changing the numbers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;201(1):33-40
71. 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
72. Dose index registry. American College of Radiology Web site.http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/National-Radiology-Data-Registry/Dose-Index-Registry
73. Tack D, Jahnen A, Kohler S, et al. Multidetector CT radiation dose optimisation in adults: Short-and long-term effects of a clinical audit. Eur Radiol 2014;24(1):169-175
74. California 2013 Radiation Protection Act, SB No. 1237.http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb-1201-1250/sb-1237-bill-20100929-chaptered.html
75. AAPM CT scan protocols. American Association of Physicists in Medicine Web site.http://www.aapm.org/pubs/CTProtocols
76. Brown Medical School CT protocols. Rhode Island Hospital Web site.http://www.rhodeislandhospital.org/services/diagnosticimaging/computed-tomography/protocols/ct-protocols/
77. CTisus CT protocols. CTisus Web site.http: //www.ctisus.org/ctprotocols/protocolsin dex.html
78. Chang KJ, Caovan DB, Grand DJ, Huda W, Mayo-Smith WW. Reducing radiation dose at CT colonography: Decreasing tube voltage to 100 kVp. Radiology 2013;266(3):791-800
79. Gudjonsdottir J, Svensson JR, Campling S, Brennan PC, Jonsdottir B. Efficient use of automatic exposure control systems in computed tomography requires correct patient positioning. Acta Radiol 2009;50(9): 1035-1041
80. Li J, Udayasankar UK, Toth TL, Seamans J, Small WC, Kalra MK. Automatic patient centering for MDCT: Effect on radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188(2):547-552
81. Habibzadeh MA, Ay MR, Asl AR, Ghadiri H, Zaidi H. Impact of miscentering on patient dose and image noise in x-ray CT imaging: Phantom and clinical studies. Phys Med 2012;28(3):191-199
82. Chow LC, Kwan SW, Olcott EW, Sommer G. Split-bolus MDCT urography with synchronous nephrographic and excretory phase enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189(2):314-322
83. Mangold S, Thomas C, Fenchel M, et al. Virtual nonenhanced dual-energy CT urography with tin-filter technology: Determinants of detection of urinary calculi in the renal collecting system. Radiology 2012;264(1): 119-125
84. McCollough CH. CT dose: How to measure, how to reduce. Health Phys 2008;95(5): 508-517.