Search

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the use and impact of radiation dose reduction techniques in actual practice for routine abdomen CT. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive routine abdomen CT scans in adults from a large dose registry, contributed by 95 hospitals and imaging facilities. Grouping exams into deciles by, first, patient size, and second, size-adjusted dose length product (DLP), we summarized dose and technical parameters and estimated which parameters contributed most to between-protocols dose variation. Lastly, we modeled the total population dose if all protocols with mean size-adjusted DLP above 433 or 645 mGy-cm were reduced to these thresholds. RESULTS: A total of 748,846 CTs were performed using 1033 unique protocols. When sorted by patient size, patients with larger abdominal diameters had increased dose and effective mAs (milliampere seconds), even after adjusting for patient size. When sorted by size-adjusted dose, patients in the highest versus the lowest decile in size-adjusted DLP received 6.4 times the average dose (1680 vs 265 mGy-cm) even though diameter was no different (312 vs 309 mm). Effective mAs was 2.1-fold higher, unadjusted CTDIvol 2.9-fold, and phase 2.5-fold for patients in the highest versus lowest size-adjusted DLP decile. There was virtually no change in kV (kilovolt). Automatic exposure control was widely used to modulate mAs, whereas kV modulation was rare. Phase was the strongest driver of between-protocols variation. Broad adoption of optimized protocols could result in total population dose reductions of 18.6-40%. CONCLUSION: There are large variations in radiation doses for routine abdomen CT unrelated to patient size. Modification of kV and single-phase scanning could result in substantial dose reduction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Radiation dose-optimization techniques for routine abdomen CT are routinely under-utilized leading to higher doses than needed. Greater modification of technical parameters and number of phases could result in substantial reduction in radiation exposure to patients. KEY POINTS: • Based on an analysis of 748,846 routine abdomen CT scans in adults, radiation doses varied tremendously across patients of the same size and optimization techniques were routinely under-utilized. • The difference in observed dose was due to variation in technical parameters and phase count. Automatic exposure control was commonly used to modify effective mAs, whereas kV was rarely adjusted for patient size. Routine abdomen CT should be performed using a single phase, yet multi-phase was common. • kV modulation by patient size and restriction to a single phase for routine abdomen indications could result in substantial reduction in radiation doses using well-established dose optimization approaches.

Ob jectivesThe European Society of Radiology identified 10 common indications for computed tomography (CT) as part of the European Study on Clinical Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs, EUCLID), to help standardize radiation doses. The objective of this study is to generate DRLs and median doses for these indications using data from the UCSF CT International Dose Registry.MethodsStandardized data on 3.7 million CTs in adults were collected between 2016 and 2019 from 161 institutions across seven countries (United States of America (US), Switzerland, Netherlands, Germany, UK, Israel, Japan). DRLs (75th percentile) and median doses for volumetric CT-dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were assessed for each EUCLID category (chronic sinusitis, stroke, cervical spine trauma, coronary calcium scoring, lung cancer, pulmonary embolism, coronary CT angiography, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), colic/abdominal pain, appendicitis), and US radiation doses were compared with European.ResultsThe number of CT scans within EUCLID categories ranged from 8,933 (HCC) to over 1.2 million (stroke). There was greater variation in dose between categories than within categories (p < .001), and doses were significantly different between categories within anatomic areas. DRLs and median doses were assessed for all categories. DRLs were higher in the US for 9 of the 10 indications (except chronic sinusitis) than in Europe but with a significantly higher sample size in the US.ConclusionsDRLs for CTDIvol and DLP for EUCLID clinical indications from diverse organizations were established and can contribute to dose optimization. These values were usually significantly higher in the US than in Europe.Key points• Registry data were used to create benchmarks for 10 common indications for CT identified by the European Society of Radiology. • Observed US radiation doses were higher than European for 9 of 10 indications (except chronic sinusitis). • The presented diagnostic reference levels and median doses highlight potentially unnecessary variation in radiation dose.

ImportanceComputed tomography (CT) radiation doses vary across institutions and are often higher than needed.ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of 2 interventions to reduce radiation doses in patients undergoing CT.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial included 864 080 adults older than 18 years who underwent CT of the abdomen, chest, combined abdomen and chest, or head at 100 facilities in 6 countries from November 1, 2015, to September 21, 2017. Data analysis was performed from October 4, 2017, to December 14, 2018.InterventionsImaging facilities received audit feedback alone comparing radiation-dose metrics with those of other facilities followed by the multicomponent intervention, including audit feedback with targeted suggestions, a 7-week quality improvement collaborative, and best-practice sharing. Facilities were randomly allocated to the time crossing from usual care to the intervention.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were the proportion of high-dose CT scans and mean effective dose at the facility level. Secondary outcomes were organ doses. Outcomes after interventions were compared with those before interventions using hierarchical generalized linear models adjusting for temporal trends and patient characteristics.ResultsAcross 100 facilities, 864 080 adults underwent 1 156 657 CT scans. The multicomponent intervention significantly reduced proportions of high-dose CT scans, measured using effective dose. Absolute changes in proportions of high-dose scans were 1.1% to 7.9%, with percentage reductions in the proportion of high-dose scans of 4% to 30% (abdomen: odds ratio [OR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.88; P

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine MDCT dose variability due to technologist variability in performing CT studies., Materials and Methods: Fifty consecutive adult patients who underwent two portal venous phase CT examinations of the abdomen and pelvis on the same 64-MDCT scanner between January and December 2011 were retrospectively identified. Tube voltage (kVp), tube current (mA), use of automated tube current modulation (ATCM), dose-length product (DLP), volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), table height, whether the localizer image was obtained using the posteroanterior or the anteroposterior technique, arm position, and number of overscanned slices were recorded., Results: For a given patient, the total examination DLP difference comparing the two MDCT studies ranged from 0.1% to 238.0%. For the same patient, total examination DLP was always higher when the localizer image was obtained with the posteroanterior compared with the anteroposterior technique. When table position was closer to the x-ray source, patients appeared magnified in the posteroanterior localizer image (8-29%; average, 14%) and higher tube currents were selected with ATCM. Localizer technique, table height, arm position, number of overscanned slices, and technologist were all significant predictors of dose., Conclusion: Patient off-centering closer to the x-ray source resulted in patient magnification in the posteroanterior localizer image, leading to higher tube currents with ATCM and increased DLP. Differences in technologist, arm position, and overscanning also resulted in dose variability.