Establishing Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for CT Angiography Examinations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31584/jhsmr.20241084Keywords:
CT cerebral angiography, CT lower limb angiography with aortogram, CT pulmonary angiography, CT upper limb angiography, diagnostic reference levelsAbstract
Objective: Computed tomography angiography (CTA) examinations are performed to diagnose blood vessel anomalies. However, this examination results in a significant radiation dose being received by the patient. Local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are necessary for determining the extent of radiation dose during examinations. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to establish local DRL values for CTA examinations.
Material and Methods: In this study, a total of 213 participants underwent CTA examination; wherein: 67 underwent computed tomography (CT) cerebral angiography (CTCA), 80 underwent CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA), 40 underwent CT lower limb angiography with aortogram (CTLLA), and 26 underwent CT upper limb angiography (CTULA). Body mass index along with the circumference of the body were calculated. A number of dose descriptors; such as computed tomography dose index volume (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP), were collected, and DLP was used to calculate the effective dose, using the conversion factor.
Results: For the angiography phase, CTCA, CTPA, CTLLA, and CTULA had median CTDIvol values of: 31.62, 6.38, 12.16, and 10.12 mGy, respectively. Median DLP and effective dose for CTCA were: 1388.64 mGy*cm & 4.30 mSv, CTPA were 243 mGy*cm & 3.41 mSv, CTLLA were 1855.86 mGy*cm & 12.06 mSv, and CTULA were 945.98 mGy*cm & 2.93 mSv, respectively.
Conclusion: The estimated local DRLs were lower than the international standard for the angiographic phase; however, the dose exceeded the international standard when the entire examination was considered. This study revealed the need for dose optimization in CTA examinations.
References
Wachabauer D, Röthlin F, Moshammer HM, Homolka P. Diagnostic reference levels for computed tomography in Austria: a 2018 nationwide survey on adult patients. Eur J Radiol 2020;125.
Tsapaki V, Damilakis J, Paulo G, Schegerer AA, Repussard J, Jaschke W, et al. CT diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications: results of a large-scale European survey. Eur Radiol 2021;4459–69.
Ginat DT, Gupta R. Advances in computed tomography imaging technology. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2014;16:431–53.
Cho PK. The development of a diagnostic reference level on patient dose for head computed tomography angiography examinations in korea. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2013;154:505–9.
Mnyusiwalla A, Aviv RI, Symons SP. Radiation dose from multidetector row CT imaging for acute stroke. Neuroradiology 2009;51:635–40.
Kumamaru KK, Hoppel BE, Mather RT, Rybicki FJ. CT angiography: current technology and clinical use. Radiol Clin North Am 2010;48:213-35.
Kanal KM, Butler PF, Sengupta D, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Coombs LP, Morin RL. U.S. diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for 10 adult CT examinations. Radiology 2017;284:120–33.
Holroyd JR, Walker A. Recommendations for the design of x-ray facilities and the quality assurance of dental cone beam CT (computed tomography) systems: a report of the HPA working party on dental cone beam CT. Oxford: HPA-RD-065; 2010.
Berrington De González A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, Mettler F, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2071–7.
Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, Kim KP, Mahesh M, Gould R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2078–86.
McCollough, C H. Diagnostic reference levels. JACR 2010;1-6.
Brink JA, Miller DL. U.S. national diagnostic reference levels: closing the gap. Radiology 2015;277:3-6.
Clarke RH, J Dunster CH, K Guskova LA, Jacobi MW, Li ND, Liniecki TJ, et al. Annals of the ICRP Published on behalf of the lnternational Commission on Radiological Protection Members of the Main Commission of the ICRP. Ann ICRP Publication 60;21:1-3.
European Union. Council Directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing Directive 84/466/Euratom. EUR-Lex 1997;22-7.
Foley SJ, Mcentee MF, Rainford LA. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J Radiol 2012;85:1390–7.
Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Estimating effective dose for ct using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: Consequences of adopting international commission on radiological protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:881–9.
Saltybaeva N, Jafari ME, Hupfer M, Kalender WA. Estimates of effective dose for CT scans of the lower extremities. Radiology 2014;273:153–9.
Vañó E, Miller DL, Martin CJ, Rehani MM, Kang K, Rosenstein M, et al. ICRP publication 135: diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. Ann ICRP 2017;46:1–144.
Yang CC. Evaluation of impact of factors affecting CT radiation dose for optimizing patient dose levels. Diagnostics 2020;10.
Zewdu M, Kadir E, Tesfaye M, Berhane M. Establishing local diagnostic reference levels for routine computed tomography examinations in jimma university medical center south west Ethiopia. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2021;193:200–6.
Korir GK, Wambani JS, Korir IK, Tries MA, Boen PK. National diagnostic reference level initiative for computed tomography examinations in Kenya. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2016;168:253–60.
Kim MC, Han DK, Nam YC, Kim YM, Yoon J. Patient dose for computed tomography examination: Dose reference levels and effective doses based on a national survey of 2013 in Korea. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2015;164:383–91.
Alkhorayef M, Babikir E, Alrushoud A, Al-Mohammed H, Sulieman A. Patient radiation biological risk in computed tomography angiography procedure. Saudi J Biol Sci 2017;24:235–40.
Treier R, Aroua A, Verdun FR, Samara E, Stuessi A, Trueb PR. Patient doses in CT examinations in Switzerland: Implementation of national diagnostic reference levels. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2010;142:244–54.
Ngaile JE, Msaki PK, Suleiman SA, Chuma FM, Muhogora WE, Jusabani AM. Estimation of patient radiation doses from multi-detector computed tomography angiography procedures in Tanzania. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2021;197:63–77.
Harun HH, Abdul Karim MK, Abd Rahman MA, Abdul Razak HR, Che Isa IN, Harun F. Establishment of CTPA local diagnostic reference levels with noise magnitude as a quality indicator in a tertiary care hospital. Diagnostics 2020;10.
MacGregor K, Li I, Dowdell T, Gray BG. Identifying institutional diagnostic reference levels for CT with radiation dose index monitoring software. Radiology 2015;276:507–17.
Klosterkemper Y, Thomas C, Bethge OT, Appel E, Aissa J, Boeven J, et al. Implementation of Institutional Size-Specific Diagnostic Reference Levels for CT Angiography. Acad Radiol 2019;26:1661–7.
Aberle C, Ryckx N, Treier R, Schindera S. Update of national diagnostic reference levels for adult CT in Switzerland and assessment of radiation dose reduction since 2010. Eur Radiol 2020;30:1690–700.
Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG, Leonardi M, van Persijn van Meerten E, Rodrı´guez R, et al. Quality criteria for multislice computed tomography. Results from a European concerted action on CT (FIGM-CT-2000-20078) Appendix B. European Field Survey onMSCT 2004.
Salama DH, Vassileva J, Mahdaly G, Shawki M, Salama A, Gilley D, et al. Establishing national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for computed tomography in Egypt. Physica Medica 2017;39:16–24.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
