Optimization of Radiation Dose in Cranial Computed Tomography among Adults: Assessment of Radiation Dose against Image Quality

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Department of Radiology and Radiotherapy Technology, International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Radiology and Radiotherapy Technology, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction: The rapid use of computed tomography (CT) scan is of great concern, due to increase in patients’ dose. Optimization of CT protocol is a vital issue in dose reduction. This study aimed to optimize radiation dose in cranial CT and assess modifications in image quality under radiation dose reduction.
Material and Methods: A poly(methyl methacrylate) phantom was used for quality control test on CT scanners. Data of 214 scan parameters, dose indicators; volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) of patients who underwent cranial CT scans were collected. The data were grouped into three, with respect to the slice numbers of 24, 28, and 32. Tube voltage (kVp) and slice thickness were constant; (110 kVp and 4.8 mm, respectively), at variable tube currents (mAs). A one-sample t-test was used to compare the dose indicator values of the hospital protocol with a recommended protocol. Scan parameters were optimized for radiation dose against image quality.
Results: Increased mAs resulted in increased CTDIvol and DLP at constant kVp and slice thickness. Moreover, dose indicators recorded the lowest and highest values at the slice numbers of 24 and 32, respectively. An increase in slice numbers affected dose indicators. Dose indicators recorded significant reduction (p <0.001) in comparison to the recommended protocol.
Conclusion: Optimization of CT protocol considers radiation dose and image quality. Radiologists adopted protocols acquired with lower scan parameters and dose indicators lower than the recommended achievable dose limit of 58 mGy.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1.  

    1. Kim JS, Kwon SM, Kim JM, Yoon SW. New organ-based tube current modulation method to reduce the radiation dose during computed tomography of the head: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose to the eyes in the phantom study. Radiol Med. 2017; 122: 601-8.
    2. Koral K, Blackburn T, Bailey A, Koral K, Anderson J. Strengthening the argument for rapid brain MR imaging: estimation of reduction in lifetime attributable risk of developing fatal cancer in children with shunted hydrocephalus by instituting a rapid brain MR imaging protocol in lieu of head CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012; 33: 1851-4.
    3. Davis F, Il'Yasova D, Rankin K, McCarthy B, Bigner DD. Medical diagnostic radiation exposures and risk of gliomas. Radiat Res. 2011; 175: 790-6.
    4. Bassim MK, Ebert CS, Sit RC, Senior BA. Radiation dose to the eyes and parotids during CT of the sinuses. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005; 133: 531-3.
    5. McLaughlin D, Mooney R. Dose reduction to radiosensitive tissues in CT. Do commercially available shields meet the users' needs? Clin Radiol.  2004; 59: 446-50.
    6. Heaney D, Norvill C. A comparison of reduction in CT dose through the use of gantry angulations or bismuth shields. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2006; 29:172-8.
    7. Abada HT, Larchez C, Daoud B, Sigal-Cinqualbre A, Paul JF. MDCT of the coronary arteries: feasibility of low-dose CT with ECG-pulsed tube current modulation to reduce radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186: 387-90.
    8. Heyer CM, Mohr PS, Lemburg SP, Peters SA, Nicolas V. Image quality and radiation exposure at pulmonary CT angiography with 100-or 120-kVp protocol: prospective randomized study. Radiology. 2007; 245: 577-83.
    9. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Schmidt B, Westerman BL, Morgan HT, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology. 2004; 233: 649-57.
    10. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, Liu D, Nakaura T, Tamura Y, et al. Lower tube voltage reduces contrast material and radiation doses on 16-MDCT aortography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 187: 490-7.
    11. Schueller-Weidekamm C, Schaefer-Prokop CM, Weber M, Herold CJ, Prokop M. CT angiography of pulmonary arteries to detect pulmonary embolism: improvement of vascular enhancement with low kilovoltage settings. Radiology. 2006; 241: 899-907.
    12. Sigal-Cinqualbre AB, Hennequin R, Abada HT, Chen X, Paul JF. Low-kilovoltage multi–detector row chest CT in adults: feasibility and effect on image quality and iodine dose. Radiology. 2004; 231:169-74.
    13. Sulagaesuan C, Saksobhavivat N, Asavaphatiboon S, Kaewlai R. Reducing emergency CT radiation doses with simple techniques: A quality initiative project. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2016; 60: 23-34.
    14. Trattner S, Pearson GD, Chin C, Cody DD, Gupta R, Hess CP, et al. Standardization and optimization of CT protocols to achieve low dose. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2014; 11: 271-8.
    15. Aweda M, Arogundade R. Patient dose reduction methods in computerized tomography procedures: A review. Int. J. Phys. Sci. 2007; 2: 1-9.
    16. Siegel MJ, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, Hildebolt C, Bradley D, Schmidt B. Automated low-kilovoltage selection in pediatric computed tomography angiography: phantom study evaluating effects on radiation dose and image quality. Invest Radiol.  2013; 48: 584-9.
    17. Amis ES, Butler PF. ACR white paper on radiation dose in medicine: three years later. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010; 7: 865-70.
    18. De Bondt T. Dose Optimization in CT Examinations of the Brain. Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology. 2017; 101 :7.
    19. Zarb F, Rainford L, McEntee M. Frequency of CT examinations in Malta. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci. 2011; 42: 4-9.
    20. Foley SJ, McEntee MF, Rainford LA. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J Radiol. 2012; 85: 1390-7.
    21. Kumamaru KK, Kogure Y, Suzuki M, Hori M, Nakanishi A, Kamagata K, et al. A strategy to optimize radiation exposure for non-contrast head CT: comparison with the Japanese diagnostic reference levels. Jpn J Radiol. 2016; 34: 451-7.
    22. Bahreyni Toossi MT, Zare H, Eslami Z, Bayani Roodi S, Daneshdoust M, Saeed Z, et al. Assessment of Radiation Dose to the Lens of the Eye and Thyroid of Patients Undergoing Head and Neck Computed Tomography at Five Hospitals in Mashhad, Iran. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics. 2018; 15(4):226-30.
    23. Sohrabi M, Parsi M, Mianji F. Determination of National Diagnostic Reference Levels in computed tomography examinations of Iran by a new quality control-based dose survey method. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2018; 179: 206-15.
    24. Tonkopi E, Duffy S, Abdolell M, Manos D. Diagnostic Reference Levels and Monitoring Practice Can Help Reduce Patient Dose From CT Examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 208: 1073-81.
    25. Asadinezhad M, Bahreyni Toossi MT, Nouri M. Diagnostic Reference Levels for Computed Tomography Examinations in Iran: A Nationwide Radiation Dose Survey. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics. 2019; 16: 19-26.
    26. Medicine. AAPM. Routine Adult Head CT. 2016 [cited 2016 Jan 1]. Available from: https://www.aapm.org/pubs/ctprotocols/documents/adultroutineheadct.pdf.
    27. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M. Doses from computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK-2003 review. Chilton: NRPB; 2005.
    28. Amis Jr ES, Butler PF, Applegate KE, Birnbaum SB, Brateman LF, Hevezi JM, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007; 4: 272-84.
    29. Aliasgharzadeh A, Mihandoost E, Mohseni M. A survey of computed tomography dose index and dose length product level in usual computed tomography protocol. J Cancer Res Ther.  2018; 14: 549-52.
    30. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT: radiation dose in CT. Radiographics. 2002; 22: 1541-53.
    31. Tang K, Wang L, Li R, Lin J, Zheng X, Cao G. Effect of low tube voltage on image quality, radiation dose, and low-contrast detectability at abdominal multidetector CT: phantom study. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012; 2012: 1-6.
    32. Jaffe TA, Hoang JK, Yoshizumi TT, Toncheva G, Lowry C, Ravin C. Radiation dose for routine clinical adult brain CT: variability on different scanners at one institution. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195: 433-8.
    33. Huda W, Sterzik A, Tipnis S, Schoepf UJ. Organ doses to adult patients for chest CT. Med Phys. 2010; 37: 842-7.
    34. Toori AJ, Shabestani-Monfared A, Deevband M, Abdi R, Nabahati M. Dose Assessment in Computed Tomography Examination and Establishment of Local Diagnostic Reference Levels in Mazandaran, Iran. J Biomed Phys Eng. 2015; 5: 177-84.
    35. Tsalafoutas IA. The impact of overscan on patient dose with first generation multislice CT scanners. Phys Med. 2011; 27: 69-74.
    36. Zarb F, Rainford L, McEntee MF. Developing optimized CT scan protocols: Phantom measurements of image quality. Radiography. 2011; 17: 109-14.
    37. Park JE, Choi YH, Cheon JE, Kim WS, Kim IO, Cho HS, et al. Image quality and radiation dose of brain computed tomography in children: effects of decreasing tube voltage from 120 kVp to 80 kVp. Pediatr Radiol. 2017; 47: 710-7.
    38. Ben-David E, Cohen JE, Goldberg SN, Sosna J, Levinson R, Leichter IS, et al. Significance of enhanced cerebral gray–white matter contrast at 80 kVp compared to conventional 120 kVp CT scan in the evaluation of acute stroke. J Clin Neurosci. 2014; 21: 1591-4.

     

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 17, Issue 5
September and October 2020
Pages 322-330

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 20 May 2019
  • Revise Date: 02 July 2019
  • Accept Date: 13 July 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics