Search

Radiology is now predominantly a digital medium and this has extended the flexibility, efficiency and application of medical imaging. Achieving the full benefit of digital radiology requires images to be of sufficient quality to make a reliable diagnosis for each patient, while minimising risks from radiation exposure, and so involves a careful balance between competing objectives. When an optimisation programme is undertaken, a knowledge of patient doses from surveys can be valuable in identifying areas needing attention. However, any dose reduction measures must not degrade image quality to the extent that it is inadequate for the clinical purpose. The move to digital imaging has enabled versatile image acquisition and presentation, including multi-modality display and quantitative assessment, with post-processing options that adjust for optimal viewing. This means that the appearance of an image is unlikely to give any indication when the dose is higher than necessary. Moreover, options to improve performance of imaging equipment add to its complexity, so operators require extensive training to be able to achieve this. Optimisation is a continuous rather than single stage process that requires regular monitoring, review, and analysis of performance feeding into improvement and development of imaging protocols. The ICRP is in the process of publishing two reports about optimisation in digital radiology. The first report sets out components needed to ensure that a radiology service can carry optimisation through. It describes how imaging professionals should work together as a team and explains the benefits of having appropriate methodologies to monitor performance, together with the knowledge and expertise required to use them effectively. It emphasises the need for development of organisational processes that ensure tasks are carried out. The second ICRP report deals with practical requirements for optimisation of different digital radiology modalities, and builds on information provided in earlier modality specific ICRP publications., (Creative Commons Attribution license.)

Medical imaging is both valuable and essential in the care of patients. Much of this imaging depends on ionizing radiation with attendant responsibilities for judicious use when performing an examination. This responsibility applies in settings of both individual as well as multiple (recurrent) imaging with associated repeated radiation exposures. In addressing the roles and responsibilities of the medical communities in the paradigm of recurrent imaging, both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) have issued position statements, each affirmed by other organizations. The apparent difference in focus and approach has resulted in a lack of clarity and continued debate. Aiming towards a coherent approach in dealing with radiation exposure in recurrent imaging, the IAEA convened a panel of experts, the purpose of which was to identify common ground and reconcile divergent perspectives. The effort has led to clarifying recommendations for radiation exposure aspects of recurrent imaging, including the relevance of patient agency and the provider-patient covenant in clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: An increasing awareness, generating some lack of clarity and divergence in perspectives, with patients receiving relatively high radiation doses (e.g., ≥ 100 mSv) from recurrent imaging warrants a multi-stakeholder accord for the benefit of patients, providers, and the imaging community. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent medical imaging can result in an accumulation of exposures which exceeds 100 milli Sieverts. • Professional organizations have different perspectives on roles and responsibilities for recurrent imaging. • An expert panel reconciles differing perspectives for addressing radiation exposure from recurrent medical imaging., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.)

Objective. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Task Group 113 is developing reference values of organ and effective dose coefficients (DCs) for radiography, fluoroscopy, and computed tomography imaging exams. In support of these efforts, our focus is on pediatric diagnostic fluoroscopy. Contrast agents used during clinical examinations are an important consideration of the work undertaken by the Task Group. This work demonstrates the importance of including organ contrast volume concentrations for the calculation of reference organ DCs in the voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG). Approach. The ICRP newborn and 15 year female reference phantoms were utilized within the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code system for the calculation of organ DCs. A pediatric radiologist with over 30 years of clinical experience defined the imaging fields for a VCUG examination consistent with clinical practice. Of these, four imaging fields were selected for investigation. The transport simulations modeled an iodinated contrast solution similar to Bracco Group's 18% weight per volume, cystografin diatrizoate meglumine and typical bladder content was supplemented to make up the remainder volume. Iodinated contrast volumes of 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% concentration by volume were modeled and associated DCs for in-field organs were computed. Main results. Organ DCs were calculated for the urinary bladder wall, colon wall, ovaries, and uterus for both female phantoms under irradiation geometries representative of a VCUG examination. Some organ DCs increased with iodine volume in the bladder and other organ DCs decreased as the iodine contrast volume completely filled the bladder (100%). Significance. The study results demonstrate for the newborn phantom percent differences in organ DCs varied between 0%-10% for the organs of interest, while they varied between 0%-22% in the 15 year phantom suggesting the importance of including contrast media in Monte Carlo radiation transport simulations of the VCUG examination., (© 2024 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine. All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.)

Purpose: The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) Development Programme is being explored in the radiation field, as an overarching framework to identify and prioritize research needs that best support strengthening of radiation risk assessment and risk management strategies. To advance the use of AOPs, an international horizon-style exercise (HSE) was initiated through the Radiation/Chemical AOP Joint Topical Group (JTG) formed by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) High-Level Group on Low Dose Research (HLG-LDR) under the auspices of the Committee on Radiological Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). The intent of the HSE was to identify key research questions for consideration in AOP development that would help to reduce uncertainties in estimating the health risks following exposures to low dose and low dose-rate ionizing radiation. The HSE was conducted in several phases involving the solicitation of relevant questions, a collaborative review of open-ended candidate questions and an elimination exercise that led to the selection of 25 highest priority questions for the stated purpose. These questions were further ranked by over 100 respondents through an international survey. This final set of questions was judged to provide insights into how the OECD's AOP approach can be put into practice to meet the needs of hazard and risk assessors, regulators, and researchers. This paper examines the 25 priority questions in the context of hazard/risk assessment framework for ionizing radiation., Conclusion: By addressing the 25 priority questions, it is anticipated that constructed AOPs will have a high level of specificity, making them valuable tools for simplifying and prioritizing complex biological processes for use in developing revised radiation hazard and risk assessment strategies.