CT radiation: Key concepts for gentle and wise use

Radiographics

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1706-1721

  Kalra, Mannudeep K ^a   Sodickson, Aaron D ^b   Mayo Smith, William W ^b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVERSE EFFECTS; ANTIBODY SPECIFICITY; BODY SIZE; CHILD; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DEVICE SAFETY; DEVICES; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMAN; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION INJURIES; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIOMETRY; REGISTER; RISK MANAGEMENT; STANDARDS; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURE; UTILIZATION;

ADULT; BENCHMARKING; BODY SIZE; CHILD; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, RADIATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; ORGAN SPECIFICITY; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION INJURIES; RADIOMETRY; REGISTRIES; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOFTWARE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; UNNECESSARY PROCEDURES;

EID: 84944322509     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.2015150118     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Mayo-Smith WW, Hara AK, Mahesh M, Sahani DV, Pavlicek W. How I do it: managing radiation dose in CT. Radiology 2014;273(3):657-672.
2. Mettler FA Jr, Bhargavan M, Faulkner K, et al. Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources-1950-2007. Radiology 2009;253(2):520-531.
3. Fletcher JG, Kofler JM, Coburn JA, Bruining DH, McCollough CH. Perspective on radiation risk in CT imaging. Abdom Imaging 2013;38(1):22-31.
4. Sodickson A. Strategies for reducing radiation exposure in multi-detector row CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2012;50 (1):1-14.
5. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230(3):619-628.
6. 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.
7. Frush D, Denham CR, Goske MJ, et al. Radiation protection and dose monitoring in medical imaging: a journey from awareness, through accountability, ability and action…but where will we arrive? J Patient Saf 2013;9(4):232-238.
8. American Board of Radiology. Diagnostic radiology: core quality and safety study guide. http://www.theabr.org/sites/all /themes/abr-media/pdf/Core_Exam_Quality_and_Safety_ Syllabus_1st_ed_FINAL.pdf. Updated February 20, 2015. Accessed July 16, 2015.
9. Bogdanich W. After stroke scans, patients face serious health risks. New York Times. July 31, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/health/01radiation.html?_r=1&ref=radiation. Accessed October 20, 2010.
10. Joint Commission. The Joint Commission Sentinel Event Alert: radiation risks of diagnostic imaging. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/SEA_47.pdf. Published August 24, 2011.
11. 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.
12. Tubiana M, Feinendegen LE, Yang C, Kaminski JM. The linear no-threshold relationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data. Radiology 2009;251 (1):13-22.
13. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100(24):13761-13766.
14. National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII, phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006.
15. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380(9840):499-505.
16. Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z, et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ 2013;346:f2360.
17. Huang WY, Muo CH, Lin CY, et al. Paediatric head CT scan and subsequent risk of malignancy and benign brain tumour: a nation-wide population-based cohort study. Br J Cancer 2014;110(9):2354-2360.
18. Sodickson A. CT radiation risks coming into clearer focus. BMJ 2013;346:f3102.
19. Journy N, Rehel JL, Ducou Le Pointe H, et al. Are the studies on cancer risk from CT scans biased by indication? Elements of answer from a large-scale cohort study in France. Br J Cancer 2015;112(1):185-193.
20. Krille L, Dreger S, Schindel R, et al. Risk of cancer incidence before the age of 15 years after exposure to ionising radiation from computed tomography: results from a German cohort study. Radiat Environ Biophys 2015;54(1):1-12.
21. Boice JD Jr. Radiation epidemiology and recent paediatric computed tomography studies. Ann ICRP 2015;44(1 suppl):236-248.
22. Huda W, Rowlett WT, Schoepf UJ. Radiation dose at cardiac computed tomography: facts and fiction. J Thorac Imaging 2010;25(3):204-212.
23. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L, Christner J. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2009;47(1):27-40.
24. Sodickson A, Warden GI, Farkas CE, et al. Exposing exposure: automated anatomy-specific CT radiation exposure extraction for quality assurance and radiation monitoring. Radiology 2012;264(2):397-405.
25. 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.
26. Turner AC, Zhang D, Khatonabadi M, et al. The feasibility of patient size-corrected, scanner-independent organ dose estimates for abdominal CT exams. Med Phys 2011;38(2):820-829.
27. AAPM task group 204. AAPM Report 204: size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2011. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/ reports/rpt_204.pdf.
28. Noferini L, Fulcheri C, Taddeucci A, Bartolini M, Gori C. Considerations on the practical application of the size-specific dose estimation (SSDE) method of AAPM Report 204. Radiol Phys Technol 2014;7(2):296-302.
29. Brady SL, Kaufman RA. Investigation of American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204 size-specific dose estimates for pediatric CT implementation. Radiology 2012;265(3):832-840.
30. AAPM Report 220: use of water equivalent diameter for calculating patient size and size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in CT. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2014. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/ reports/rpt_220.pdf.
31. AAPM Report No. 96: The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008. http:// www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/rpt_96.pdf.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. McCollough C, Branham T, Herlihy V, et al. Diagnostic reference levels from the ACR CT Accreditation Program. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(11):795-803.
35. American College of Radiology. Computed tomography accreditation. American College of Radiology Web site. http:// www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Accreditation/CT. Updated November 18, 2013. Accessed March 1, 2015.
36. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Reference levels and achievable doses in medical and dental imaging: recommendations for the United States-NCRP report no. 172. Bethesda, Md: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 2012.
37. ACR-AAPM practice guideline for diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses in medical x-ray imaging, rev 2014. http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Standards-Guidelines/ Practice-Guidelines-by-Modality/~/media/ACR/Documents/ PGTS/guidelines/Reference_Levels.pdf.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AAPM CT lexicon version 1.3. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/CTProtocols/ documents/CTTerminologyLexicon.pdf. Published April 20, 2012. Accessed April 2, 2015.
41. Lell MM, Jost G, Korporaal JG, et al. Optimizing contrast media injection protocols in state-of-the art computed tomographic angiography. Invest Radiol 2015;50(3):161-167.
42. Noda Y, Kanematsu M, Goshima S, et al. Reduction of iodine load in CT imaging of pancreas acquired with low tube voltage and an adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2014;38(5):714-720.
43. Lira D, Padole A, Kalra MK, Singh S. Tube potential and CT radiation dose optimization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;204(1):W4-W10.
44. Sodickson A, Weiss M. Effects of patient size on radiation dose reduction and image quality in low-kVp CT pulmonary angiography performed with reduced IV contrast dose. Emerg Radiol 2012;19(5):437-445.
45. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233(3):649-657.
46. Singh S, Kalra MK, Shenoy-Bhangle AS, et al. Radiation dose reduction with hybrid iterative reconstruction for pediatric CT. Radiology 2012;263(2):537-546.
47. Ghoshhajra BB, Engel LC, Károlyi M, et al. Cardiac computed tomography angiography with automatic tube potential selection: effects on radiation dose and image quality. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28(1):40-48.
48. Khawaja RD, Singh S, Otrakji A, et al. Dose reduction in pediatric abdominal CT: use of iterative reconstruction techniques across different CT platforms. Pediatr Radiol 2015;45(7):1046-1055.
49. Singh S, Khawaja RD, Pourjabbar S, Padole A, Lira D, Kalra MK. Iterative image reconstruction and its role in cardiothoracic computed tomography. J Thorac Imaging 2013;28(6):355-367.
50. Wallihan DB, Podberesky DJ, Sullivan J, et al. Diagnostic performance and dose comparison of filtered back projection and adaptive iterative dose reduction three-dimensional CT enterography in children and young adults. Radiology 2015;276(1):233-242.
51. Bombiński P, Warchoł S, Brzewski M, et al. Lower-dose CT urography (CTU) with iterative reconstruction technique in children: initial experience and examination protocol. Pol J Radiol 2014;79:137-144.
52. McKnight CD, Watcharotone K, Ibrahim M, Christodoulou E, Baer AH, Parmar HA. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: reducing dose while preserving image quality in the pediatric head CT examination. Pediatr Radiol 2014;44(8):997-1003.
53. Brady SL, Moore BM, Yee BS, Kaufman RA. Pediatric CT: implementation of ASIR for substantial radiation dose reduction while maintaining pre-ASIR image noise. Radiology 2014;270(1):223-231.
54. McCollough CH, Yu L, Kofler JM, et al. Degradation of CT low-contrast spatial resolution due to the use of iterative reconstruction and reduced dose levels. Radiology 2015 Mar 26:142047. [Epub ahead of print].
55. 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.
56. 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.
57. Duan X, Wang J, Leng S, et al. Electronic noise in CT detectors: impact on image noise and artifacts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;201(4):W626-W632.
58. Brink JA. Dose tracking and rational examination selection for the medically-exposed population. Health Phys 2014;106(2):225-228.
59. Singh S, Kalra MK, Thrall JH, Mahesh M. Pointers for optimizing radiation dose in head CT protocols. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(8):591-593.
60. Wintermark M, Lev MH. FDA investigates the safety of brain perfusion CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31(1):2-3.
61. Khawaja RD, Singh S, Gilman M, et al. Computed tomography (CT) of the chest at less than 1 mSv: an ongoing prospective clinical trial of chest CT at submillisievert radiation doses with iterative model image reconstruction and iDose4 technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2014;38 (4):613-619.
62. Gordic S, Morsbach F, Schmidt B, et al. Ultralow-dose chest computed tomography for pulmonary nodule detection: first performance evaluation of single energy scanning with spectral shaping. Invest Radiol 2014;49(7):465-473.
63. Murugan VA, Kalra MK, Rehani M, Digumarthy SR. Lung cancer screening: computed tomography radiation and protocols. J Thorac Imaging 2015 Apr 4. [Epub ahead of print].
64. Moore CL, Daniels B, Ghita M, et al. Accuracy of reduced-dose computed tomography for ureteral stones in emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med 2015;65(2):189-198. e2.
65. Jin DH, Lamberton GR, Broome DR, et al. Effect of reduced radiation CT protocols on the detection of renal calculi. Radiology 2010;255(1):100-107.
66. Rehani MM. ICRP and IAEA actions on radiation protection in computed tomography. Ann ICRP 2012;41(3- 4):154-160.
67. Rumack CM. 2010 ACR Presidential Address: patient-focused radiology-taking charge of radiation dose. J Am Coll Radiol 2010;7(11):837-844.
68. Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Bulas D, et al. Image Gently: progress and challenges in CT education and advocacy. Pediatr Radiol 2011;41(suppl 2):461-466.
69. Brink JA, Amis ES Jr. Image Wisely: a campaign to increase awareness about adult radiation protection. Radiology 2010;257(3):601-602.
70. Ellenbogen PH, Tashjian JH. RadiologyInfo: reaching out to touch patients. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4(11):809-815.
71. Joint Commission. The Joint Commission prepublication requirements: revised requirements for diagnostic imaging services. http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/HAP-CAH_DiagImag_Prepub_July2015release_20150105.pdf. Published January 9, 2015. Accessed March 30, 2015.
72. Duong PA, Little BP. Dose tracking and dose auditing in a comprehensive computed tomography dose-reduction program. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2014;35(4):322-330.
73. Morin RL, Coombs LP, Chatfield MB. ACR Dose Index Registry. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8(4):288-291.
74. Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Morin RL. The ACR Computed Tomography Dose Index Registry: the 5 million examination update. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10(12):980-983.