strategies for reducing radiation dose in ct. source: imv medical information division 2004 ct...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT
![Page 2: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census
![Page 3: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
7 Practical Steps for Reducing
Radiation Dose in CT
Disclosures: None
![Page 4: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
1. Avoid Unnecessary CTs
![Page 5: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Use e-POE with Decision Support
![Page 6: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
E-POE with Decision Support
Ref: Sistrom C L et al. Radiology 2009;251:147-155
![Page 7: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
• Radiation dose is proportional to total scan length• Targeted CT scans
– Indeterminate renal mass w/u: abdomen only• Ref: Prasad et al JCAT 2002
– Kidney stone low-dose protocol: mid-liver
– Abd-Pel CT: Average 12 extra slices• Ref: Kalra et al, Radiology 2004
2. Avoid z-creep: anatomy
![Page 8: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
2. Avoid z-creep: phases• Radiation dose is proportional to total scan length
– Limit number of phases• 1 to 2 phases: 2x dose• CT Urography in patients with hematuria: 2 phases
– Non-CM + combined Nephrographic & Excretory• Ref: Chai et al. Australas Radiol. 2001 Nov;45:536-8
– I- only if stones seen in patients aged <40 years
![Page 9: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
3. Lower mAs: leverage technology• Decreasing mAs lowers radiation dose
Ref: McNitt-Gray; Radiographics 2002
Δ mA: effects noise only
Fixed kVp
![Page 10: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Use Automatic Current Modulation
• mA determined from size & density on scanogram
• Radiologist decides ‘noisy’ vs. ‘smooth’ images– Clinical question
• Soft-tissue contrast
• Operator selects ‘reference mA’ or ‘noise index’ or..
• Scanner picks mA: size and density
SMOOTH NOISY
Benign Renal Cyst Renal Stone, CTA
Malignant Liver Met Colonography
![Page 11: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Use Automatic Current Modulation
mAs: 93 112 76 170
• mA modulation in abdominal CT– Radiation dose with a 16-channel MDCT
• 54/62 pts:↓ mean 37.9%, but 8/62 pts: ↑ mean 11.6%• Ref: Kalra et al; Radiology Oct 2004
![Page 12: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
3866330
• Hx: Flank pain; ? Kidney Stone– Noise Index: 20 – Effective Dose: ~1.5 mSv
176 mAs
37.5 mAs
Ref: Kalra et al. Radiology 2004
Low mA CT
![Page 13: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
200 mAs
FBP Partial IR Full IR
100 mAs
50 mAs
Lower mA further with IR Algorithms
Courtesy: M. Kalra
![Page 14: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Lowering mAs with IR
c/w Historical: 50% 30% 15%
![Page 15: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
4. Consider Lowering kVp• Decreasing kVp also lowers radiation dose• Effect on image quality differs
Ref: McNitt-Gray; Radiographics 2002
Δ kVp: effects noise & attenuation
Fixed mAs
Δ mA: effects noise only
Fixed kVp
![Page 16: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
CT Technique Physics
• kVp: 80 100 120 140
• mAs (iso-fluence; 70kg): 1000 430 200 120
• Relative Dose (CTDIw): 1.9 1.6 1.2 1.0– Refs: Huda, Rad 00; McNitt-Gray, RadioGraph 02;
Johnson, et al, Eur Radiology 2006
![Page 17: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
• kVp: 80 100 120 140
• mAs (iso-fluence; 70kg): 1000 430 200 120
• 10Kg (=120/200 70Kg): 65 33 17 11
Siegel et al. Radiology 2004
Singh et al, Radiology 2009
Low kVp: Pediatric CT
MGH Pediatric Protocols
![Page 18: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Low kVp sub-mSv Stone CT
![Page 19: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Low kVp: CTA
• Peak kilo-voltage (kVp): 80 100 120 140
• Iodine attenuation 1.0 0.75 0.60 0.50
– Mean keV 43.7 51.6 56.8 61.5
– K-edge I: 33.2 keV
• Low kVp w/o ↑ mAs
– High contrast CT
Nyman et al. Radiology 2002
![Page 20: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Low kVp: Donor CTA
• Sahani et al, AJR 2006
![Page 21: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
5. Technique: indication, age & weight
• Pink: routine (95-190)
• Green: ↓ f/u benign e.g. abscess (70-140)
• Red: ↓↓ bone CT (50-100)
• Yellow: kidney stone (95-190)
• Blue: ↑subtle lesions (120-240)
• Grey: CTA (95-190)Singh et al, Radiology 2009
![Page 22: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
6. Dose Monitoring
– Example: Effective Dose = DLP/100 *1.5 = 24 mSv– Typical body CT DLP 700 mGy.cm or ~10 mSv– Annual Non-medical background radiation: ~3 mSv
![Page 23: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Deaths: 30,050 vs 30,0000.16% Increase
Ref: Brenner et al, Gasgtroenterology 2005
7. Understand Risk
![Page 24: Strategies for Reducing Radiation Dose in CT. Source: IMV Medical Information division 2004 CT Census](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032605/56649e735503460f94b73a18/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Summary
• Right Test• Focused Protocols• Optimized kVP & mA
– Technology– Indications, age
• Monitor Dose• Understand Risk
Culture trumps Strategy
776
Year
39
0102030405060
50 65 80 96Mis
hap
s/10
0,00
0 F
ligh
t H
ours
Friday May 2, 2003