Search

Medical applications of ionising radiation (IR) represent a key component of the diagnosis and treatment of many diseases, guaranteeing efficient health care. The use of IR in medicine, the largest source of general population radiation exposure, is potentially associated with increased risk of cancer and non-cancer diseases, which needs to be evaluated to provide evidence-based input for risk-benefit considerations. Efforts are also needed to improve the safety and efficacy of medical applications through optimisation. The EC Euratom programme enhances research in medical radiation protection. The four complementary multidisciplinary projects presented here contribute to (1) improving knowledge on exposure and effects of diagnostic and therapeutic applications and (2) transferring results into clinical practice. The common aim is to optimise use for individual patients, enhance education and training, ensuring adherence to ethical standards, particularly related to technologies based on artificial intelligence. MEDIRAD, SINFONIA and HARMONIC focus on improving exposure estimation and studying the detrimental effects of diagnostic and therapeutic medical exposures in patients and staff using different endpoints. EURAMED rocc-n-roll brings together the results of the projects and the recommendations generated by them to build, in collaboration with the EU Radiation Protection research platforms, a strategic research agenda and a roadmap for research priorities.

The recently implemented European Council Basic Safety Standards Directive (BSSD), 2013/59/Euratom lays down core radiation protection standards for European radiology departments, including a mandatory requirement for supporting processes of clinical audit. A repeat survey on behalf of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) was undertaken in February 2021, involving the ESR EuroSafe Imaging Star department network, to re-assess compliance with selected key BSSD requirements following an initial survey in 2018 where variable compliance was demonstrated. 61% (78/128) of eligible departments participated and overall the survey results revealed a mixed picture in terms of implementation of BSSD requirements when compared to the 2018 survey with both improvement and deterioration observed. This pattern was seen also in relation to supporting processes of regulatory audit and re-audit. Higher levels of "skipping" of responses were also observed in 2021. These findings were unexpected in light of the interventions in relation to audit (clinical and regulatory) and radiation protection undertaken by the ESR and other organisations in recent years, but can reasonably be explained by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with consequent significant disruption of radiology services. The 2021 survey results do serve to highlight again the need for co-ordinated intervention involving relevant European bodies, organisations and governmental agencies to address the important issues raised by this survey. The European Commission clinical audit and radiation protection initiatives, QuADRANT, led by the ESR, and SAMIRA will act as important drivers for improvement in patient safety, experience and outcomes across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Value-based radiology (VBR) is rapidly gaining ground as a means of considering the input of radiology practice into individual and societal healthcare, and represents a welcome move away from older metrics focused on counting studies performed, without consideration of whether these studies contributed positively to patient management or to society as a whole. Intrinsic to the process of considering whether radiology activity confers value is recognising the breadth of involvement of radiology in healthcare delivery; previous ESR and multi-society publications have explored this, and have sought to highlight the many ways in which our specialty contributes to patient welfare. This paper is intended to highlight some current ESR activities which already contribute substantially to value creation and delivery, and to outline a selection of practical steps which could be taken by the ESR in the future to enhance value. Patient summary Value-based radiology (VBR) is a conceptual means of looking at the benefits conferred on patients and on society as a whole by provision of radiology services, as opposed to older means of counting numbers of radiology studies performed, without consideration of whether or not those studies contributed overall value. VBR will become increasingly important in the future as a means of determining resources. The ESR has been a leader in advancing VBR concepts and educating radiologists about this novel way of looking at what we do. This paper is designed to highlight current ESR activities which contribute value to healthcare, and to consider other ways in which the ESR could potentially support value enhancement in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces the European Society of Radiology's EuroSafe Imaging initiative in the year of its 6th anniversary. The European and global radiation protection frameworks are outlined and the role of the EuroSafe Imaging initiative's Call for Action in successfully achieving international radiation protection goals as set out by those frameworks is detailed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale and methodology: A survey of patients was carried out between January and June 2019, to better understand how patients interpret value in relation to radiology as a means to refining the concept of Value-Based Radiology (VBR) in Europe, ensure radiology's value is properly weighted in Value-Based Health Care (VBH) metrics, and maximise the value of radiological services to patients. The survey was disseminated via various heads of radiology departments, ESR officers, patient organisations, and ESR website and social media channels. Results: Responses were received from 400 patients from 22 countries. Whilst most expressed general satisfaction with the radiological services they received, certain aspects of the radiological services they received left room for improvement. Thirty-six percent of respondents reported that they were not satisfied with the information provided about the risks and benefits of procedures, and thirty-three percent reported not being satisfied with the availability of radiologists for consultation, potentially suggesting that some patients lack sufficient information to participate fully in treatment decisions. Patients were often unaware of what information they were entitled to receive. Over eighty percent of respondents were unfamiliar with the concepts of Value-Based Radiology and/or Value-Based Health Care. Conclusion: In addition to procedural correctness (correct diagnosis, appropriate procedures performed), patients highly value information and communication with their radiologist (information provided about procedures, explanation of results, personal consultation). Lack of communication was found to be a cause of dissatisfaction in many cases. This could suggest a means of improving patient outcomes as measured by Value-Based Health Care metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This discussion paper has been produced within the context of the European Society of Radiology EuroSafe Imaging initiative and considers primarily the issues and challenges associated with justification of medical exposures using ionising radiation for individual patient diagnostic imaging procedures. It addresses both regulatory requirements and practical considerations and discusses approaches that are intended to improve justification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2013, the new European Basic Safety Standards Directive 2013/59/Euratom (BSS Directive), which defines the new legal framework for the use of ionising radiation in medical imaging and radiotherapy, was published. In 2014, the ESR EuroSafe Imaging Initiative was founded with a goal in mind "to support and strengthen medical radiation protection across Europe following a holistic, inclusive approach". To support radiology departments in developing a programme of clinical audit, the ESR developed a Guide to Clinical Audit and an accompanying audit tool in 2017, with an expanded second edition released in 2019 and published under the name of Esperanto – ESR Guide to Clinical Audit in Radiology and the ESR Clinical Audit Tool, 2019. Audits represent specific aspects at a certain point in time, usually with retrospective evaluation of data. Key performance indicators (KPIs), on the other hand, are intended to enable continuous monitoring of relevant parameters, for example to provide warnings or a dashboard. KPIs, which can, for example, be recorded automatically and visualised in dashboards, are suitable for this purpose. This paper will discuss a selection of indicators covering different areas and include suggestions for their implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Directive 2013/59/EURATOM requires member states of the European Union to ensure justification and optimisation of the radiological procedures and to include information on patient exposure as part of the report of the examinations. The EuroSafe Imaging campaign of the European Society of Radiology created a working group (WG) on "Dosimetry for imaging in clinical practice" with the aim to help with the dosimetry aspects required by European and national regulations. The primary focus topics were selected and a survey among the experts of the WG, allowed suggesting some initial consensus approaches. For information on patient exposure, it was agreed to include the dosimetric values reported by the imaging modalities (validated by a medical physics expert). It was also suggested to prepare educational material on dosimetric quantities for patients. Individual optimisation was considered a challenge, especially for interventional procedures. In these cases, patient and occupational doses should be part of the global optimisation process and trigger levels should be defined to avoid skin radiation injuries. Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) always need to be considered for comparison with periodic patient dose audits. In the case of accidental or unintended exposures, a report should be produced for the Quality Assurance programme, together with an educational note to avoid the repetition of incidents. Dose registry and management systems should allow fulfilling the regulatory requirements of national and European regulations. In a second step, and after the initial experience with the Directive implementation, a wider survey will be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical audit "according to national procedures" is a legal requirement as defined within the recently implemented European Council Basic Safety Standards Directive (BSSD), 2013/59/Euratom. A survey was undertaken in 2019 to assess the current status of clinical audit in European radiology departments and for feedback on the recently published "ESR Guide to Clinical Audit in Radiology" and the "ESR Clinical Audit Tool (Esperanto)". The survey was distributed within the European Society of Radiology (ESR) EuroSafe Imaging Star network and also to European national radiological societies which are institutional members of the ESR. A total of 47/116 (41%) EuroSafe Imaging Star departments responded, and responses were received from 43 radiology departments from 16/48 national radiological societies. Survey findings demonstrated a low awareness of recent key ESR audit-related publications (Esperanto), a lack of clinical audit infrastructure for BSSD compliance and by inference a poorly developed local/national communication and audit infrastructure in many cases. Key stakeholders, including the ESR and the European national radiological societies, will need to continue to work with other bodies to further promote, integrate and to encourage resourcing of clinical audit at all levels, facilitating BSSD compliance and improving patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recently implemented European Council Basic Safety and Standards Directive (BSSD), 2013/59/Euratom lays down core radiation protection standards for European radiology departments, with a mandatory requirement for supporting clinical audit processes. A survey on behalf of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) was undertaken in November 2018 involving the ESR EuroSafe Imaging Star department network to assess compliance with selected key BSSD requirements, with emphasis also on clinical audit/re-audit. 64% of invited departments participated and the survey results revealed a lack of compliance with BSSD requirements even when allowing for work in progress within departments. Justification processes showed the lowest rates of compliance overall, with varying results relating to dose limits, patient information and significant accidental exposure notification. Questions around implementation of diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) revealed generally far higher compliance with requirements. The survey findings confirm a lack of compliance with key BSSD radiation protection indicators and also a lack of supporting clinical audit structures. These findings are likely to be representative of the wider radiological community in Europe. There is a need for a co-ordinated response, involving relevant European agencies, national bodies and societies and also individual radiology departments to address these issues. ESR publications on clinical audit (Esperanto) and the 2018 EuroSafe Imaging Call for Action will be important components of this response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In August 2017, the European Commission awarded the "European Study on Clinical Diagnostic Reference levels for X-ray Medical Imaging" project to the European Society of Radiology, to provide up-to-date Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications. The aim of this work was to conduct an extensive literature review by analysing the most recent studies published and the data provided by the National Competent Authorities, to understand the current situation regarding Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications for computed tomography. Results: The literature review has identified 23 papers with Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications for computed tomography from 15 countries; 12 of them from Europe. A total of 28 clinical indications for 6 anatomical areas (head, cervical spine/neck, chest, abdomen, abdomen-pelvis, chest-abdomen-pelvis) have been identified. Conclusions: In all the six anatomical areas for which Diagnostic Reference Levels based on clinical indications were found, a huge variation of computed tomography dose descriptor values was identified, providing evidence for a need to develop strategies to standardise and optimise computed tomography protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review article addresses the role of lung ultrasound in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for diagnosis and disease management. As a simple imaging procedure, lung ultrasound contributes to the early identification of patients with clinical conditions suggestive of COVID-19, supports decisions about hospital admission and informs therapeutic strategy. It can be performed in various clinical settings (primary care facilities, emergency departments, hospital wards, intensive care units), but also in outpatient settings using portable devices. The article describes typical lung ultrasound findings for COVID-19 pneumonia (interstitial pattern, pleural abnormalities and consolidations), as one component of COVID-19 diagnostic workup that otherwise includes clinical and laboratory evaluation. Advantages and limitations of lung ultrasound use in COVID-19 are described, along with equipment requirements and training needs. To infer on the use of lung ultrasound in different regions, a literature search was performed using key words "COVID-19", "lung ultrasound" and "imaging". Lung ultrasound is a noninvasive, rapid and reproducible procedure; can be performed at the point of care; requires simple sterilisation; and involves non-ionising radiation, allowing repeated exams on the same patient, with special benefit in children and pregnant women. However, physical proximity between the patient and the ultrasound operator is a limitation in the current pandemic context, emphasising the need to implement specific infection prevention and control measures. Availability of qualified staff adequately trained to perform lung ultrasound remains a major barrier to lung ultrasound utilisation. Training, advocacy and awareness rising can help build up capacities of local providers to facilitate lung ultrasound use for COVID-19 management, in particular in low- and middle-income countries., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: All authors declared their interests according to WHO standard procedures. None of the interests declared were found to be significant., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

Background: In the case of breast cancer (BC), radiotherapy (RT) helps reduce locoregional recurrence and BC-related deaths but can lead to cardiotoxicity, resulting in an increased risk of long-term major cardiovascular events. It is therefore of primary importance to early detect subclinical left ventricular (LV) dysfunction in BC patients after RT and to determine the dose-response relationships between cardiac doses and these events., Methods: Within the frame of the MEDIRAD European project (2017-2022), the prospective multicenter EARLY-HEART study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03297346) included chemotherapy naïve BC women aged 40-75 years and treated with lumpectomy and adjuvant RT. Myocardial strain analysis was provided using speckle-tracking echocardiography performed at baseline and 6 months following RT. A global longitudinal strain (GLS) reduction >15% between baseline and follow-up was defined as a GLS-based subclinical LV dysfunction. Individual patient dose distributions were obtained using multi-atlas-based auto-segmentation of the heart. Dose-volume parameters were studied for the whole heart (WH) and left ventricle (LV)., Results: The sample included 186 BC women (57.5 ± 7.9 years, 64% left-sided BC). GLS-based subclinical LV dysfunction was observed in 22 patients (14.4%). These patients had significantly higher cardiac exposure regarding WH and LV doses compared to patients without LV dysfunction (for mean WH dose: 2.66 ± 1.75 Gy versus 1.64 ± 0.96 Gy, p = 0.01). A significantly increased risk of subclinical LV dysfunction was observed with the increase in the dose received to the WH [ORs from 1.13 (V 5 ) to 1.74 (D mean ); p < 0.01] and to the LV [ORs from 1.10 (V 5 ) to 1.46 (D mean ); p < 0.01]. Based on ROC analysis, the LV-V 5 parameter may be the best predictor of the short-term onset of subclinical LV dysfunction., Conclusion: These results highlighted that all cardiac doses were strongly associated with the occurrence of subclinical LV dysfunction arising 6 months after BC RT. Whether measurements of GLS at baseline and 6 months after RT combined with cardiac doses can early predict efficiently subclinical events occurring 24 months after RT remains to be investigated., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Locquet, Spoor, Crijns, van der Harst, Eraso, Guedea, Fiuza, Santos, Combs, Borm, Mousseaux, Gencer, Frija, Cardis, Langendijk and Jacob.)

This review presents basic information on the dosimetric quantities used in medical imaging for reporting patient doses and establishing diagnostic reference levels. The proper use of the radiation protection quantity "effective dose" to compare doses delivered by different radiological procedures and different imaging modalities with its uncertainties and limitations, is summarised. The estimates of population doses required by the European Directive on Basic Safety Standards is commented on. Referrers and radiologists should be familiar with the dose quantities to inform patients about radiation risks and benefits. The application of effective dose on the cumulative doses from recurrent imaging procedures is also discussed. Patient summary: Basic information on the measurement units (dosimetric quantities) used in medical imaging for reporting radiation doses should be understandable to patients. The Working Group on "Dosimetry for imaging in clinical practice" recommended that a brief explanation on the used dosimetric quantities and units included in the examination imaging report, should be available for patients. The use of the quantity "effective dose" to compare doses to which patients are exposed to from different radiological procedures and its uncertainties and limitations, should also be explained in plain language. This is also relevant for the dialog on to the cumulative doses from recurrent imaging procedures. The paper summarises these concepts, including the need to estimate the population doses required by the European Directive on Basic Safety Standards. Referrers and radiologists should be familiar with the dose quantities to inform patients about radiation risks and benefits., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Recent studies have benefited from the progress of the scanner in order to relaunch the debate on the opportunity of screening lung cancer. Even if these initial studies have succeeded in showing that the practise of helical scan allows the screening of a considerable proportion of cases at an early stage which may have 5-year survivals of up to 70%, there is no specific indication of the diminution of lung cancer-specific mortality. Studies of cohorts of several dozen millions subjects during a period of 8 to 10 years are to be realised and an international pool will be charged of the harmonization of the protocols in order to realize the analyse of the collected information. An experimental study of 1000 subjects financed by a grant have started recently in France.