Abdominal CT during pregnancy: a phantom study on the effect of patient centring on conceptus radiation dose and image quality

European Radiology

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 911-921

  Solomou, G ^a   Papadakis, A E ^b   Damilakis, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CRETE   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF HERAKLION   (Greece)

Author keywords

Automatic exposure control; Conceptus radiation dose; Horizontal miscentring; Image quality; Vertical miscentring

Indexed keywords

LITHIUM FLUORIDE; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONCEPTUS RADIATION DOSE; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; DOSIMETER; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; GESTATIONAL AGE; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; IMAGING PHANTOM; INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES; PATIENT CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTION; SECOND TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; THERMOLUMINESCENCE DOSIMETER; THIRD TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; PROCEDURES;

CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PREGNANCY; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84925466721     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3505-2     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Kennedy A (2000) Assessment of acute abdominal pain in the pregnant patient. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 21:64–77
2. Wagner LK, Huda W (2004) When a pregnant woman with suspected appendicitis is referred for a CT scan, what should a radiologist do to minimize potential radiation risks? Pediatr Radiol 34:589–590
3. Goldman SM (2000) Overview of emergency radiological management of the pregnant patient, especially the traumatized pregnant patient. Emerg Radiol 7:198–205
4. Sharp HT (2002) The acute abdomen during pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 45:405–413
5. Shetty MK (2010) Abdominal computed tomography during pregnancy: a review of indications and fetal radiation exposure issues. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 3:3–7
6. Dauer LT, Thornton RH, Miller DL et al (2012) Radiation management for interventions using fluoroscopic or computed tomographic guidance during pregnancy: A joint guideline of the society of interventional radiology and the cardiovascular and interventional radiological society of Europe with endorsement by the Canadian interventional radiology association. J Vasc Interv Radiol 23:19–32
7. Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Voloudaki A, Gourtsoyiannis N (2000) Estimation of fetal radiation dose from computed tomography scanning in late pregnancy. Depth-dose data from routine examinations. Invest Radiol 35:527–533
8. Damilakis J, Tzedakis A, Perisinakis K, Papadakis AE (2010) A method of estimating conceptus doses resulting from multidetector CT examinations during all stages of gestation. Med Phys 37:6411–6420
9. Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Tzedakis A, Papadakis AE, Karantanas A (2010) Radiation dose from multidetector CT during early gestation: A method that allows for variations in maternal body size and conceptus position. Radiology 257:483–489
10. Goldberg-Stein SA, Liu B, Hahn PF, Lee SI (2012) Radiation dose management: part 2, estimating fetal radiation risk from CT during pregnancy. Am J Roentgenol 198(4):W352–W356
11. Gilet G, Dunkin JM, Fernandez TJ, Button TM, Budorick NE (2011) Fetal radiation dose during gestation estimated on an anthropomorphic phantom for three generations of CT scanners. Am J Roentgenol 196:1133–1137
12. Jaffe TA, Neville AM, Anderson-Evans C et al (2009) Early first trimester fetal dose estimation method in a multivendor study of 16- and 64-MDCT scanners and low-dose imaging protocols. Am J Roentgenol 193:1019–1024
13. Angel E, Wellnitz CV, Goodsitt MM et al (2008) Radiation dose to the conceptus for pregnant patients undergoing multidetector CT imaging: Monte Carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size. Radiology 249:220–227
14. Bredenholler C, Feuerlein U (2006) Somatom Sensation 16 Application Guide. Medical, Siemens
15. Kalra M, Maher MM, Toth T et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657
16. Kalender W, Wolf H, Suess C (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. II. Phantom measurements. Med Phys 26:2248–2253
17. McCollough C, Bruesewitz M, Kofler JM (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: Overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512
18. Greess H, Wolf H, Baum U et al (2000) Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions. Eur Radiol 10:391–394
19. Gies M, Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. I. Simulation studies. Med Phys 26:2235–2247
20. Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Damilakis J (2008) Automatic exposure control in pediatric and adult multidetector CT examinations: a phantom study on dose reduction. Med Phys 35:4567–4576
21. van Straten M, Deak P, Shrimpton P, Kalender W (2009) The effect of angular and longitudinal tube current modulations on the estimation of organ and effective doses in x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 36:4881–4889
22. Matsubara K, Koshida K, Suzuki M, Tsujii H, Matsui O (2008) Comparison between 3-D and z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique in multidetector row CT. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 128:106–111
23. Namasivayam S, Kalra MK, Pottala KM, Waldrop SM, Hudqins PA (2006) Optimization of z-axis automatic exposure control for multidetector row CT evaluation of neck and comparison with fixed tube current technique for image quality and radiation dose. Am J Neuroradiol 27:2221–2225
24. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Kamath RS et al (2004) Sixteen- detector row CT of abdomen and pelvis: study for optimization of z-axis modulation technique performed in 153 patients. Radiology 233:241–249
25. Karla MK, Toth TL (2012) Patient centering in MDCT: Dose effects. In: Tack D et al (eds) Radiation dose from multidetector CT. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 273–278
26. Toth TL, Zhanyu GE, Daly MP (2007) The influence of patient centering on CT dose and image noise. Med Phys 34:3093–3101
27. Perisinakis K, Seimenis I, Tzedakis A, Papadakis AE, Damilakis J (2013) The effect of head size/shape, miscentering and bowtie filter on peak patient tissue doses from modern brain perfusion 256-slice CT: how can we minimize the risk for deterministic effects? Med Phys 40(1):011911
28. Li J, Udayasankar U, Toth TL, Small WC, Karla MK (2008) Application of automatic vertical positioning software to reduce radiation exposure in multidetector row computed tomography of the chest. Invest Radiol 43:447–452
29. Matsubara K, Koshida K, Ichikawa K et al (2009) Misoperation of CT automatic tube current modulation systems with inappropriate patient centering: Phantom studies. Am J Roentgenol 192:862–865
30. Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Damilakis J (2014) Automatic exposure control in CT: the effect of patient size, anatomical region and prescribed modulation strength on tube current and image quality. Eur Radiol 24:2520–2531
31. Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Oikonomou I, Damilakis J (2011) Automatic exposure control in pediatric and adult computed tomography examinations: can we estimate organ and effective dose from mean mAs reduction? Invest Radiol 46:654–662
32. Papadakis AE, Perisinakis K, Damilakis J (2007) Angular on-line tube current modulation in multidetector CT examinations of children and adults: the influence of different scanning parameters on dose reduction. Med Phys 34:2867–2874