Strategies to Limit Radiation Dose in Pediatric Computed Tomography Applications

Abstract

Computed tomography is an increasingly used imaging modality in childhood. Since pediatricpopulation possess increased radiosensitivity and radiation-related cancer risk is related withcumulative dose, the radiation exposure must be carefully established. Use of the same CTsettings for adults and children, deficiency of weight adjusted protocols, lack of consensus forthe measurement of dose and related risks of radiation, and absence of penalties for higher dosesare essential problems. Radiation dose can significantly be decreased with evaluation of -onlytargeted part of the body in appropriate conditions, rearrangement of the scanning parametersfor children, and subject based protocol and dose adjustment for each children. The alternationsin technical parameters of CT device like tube current, kilovoltage peak, table speed should bewell-known and carefully applied for limitation of the radiation dose

Keywords

• computed tomography,childhood,radiation

Pediatrik Yaşta Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Uygulamalarında Radyasyon Dozunu Azaltma Stratejileri

Abstract

Bilgisayarlı tomografi, pediyatrik yaş grubunda kullanımı gün geçtikçe artan bir görüntülemetekniğidir. Pediatrik yaş grubunun radyasyona duyarlı olması ve radyasyonun kanser riskioluşturmasında kümülatif dozun etkin olması verilen doza dikkat edilmesini gerektirmektedir.Çocuklara erişkin protokollerinin uygulanması, kilo bağımlı değişikliklerin yapılmaması, verilendozun ölçümünde ve riskin belirlenmesinde standartların belli olmaması, yüksek dozlar içincezai müeyyidenin olmaması önemli sorunlardır. Ancak gerekli durumlarda, -sadece- hedefvücut alanlarının bilgisayarlı tomografi ile değerlendirilmesi, parametrelerin çocuklar içinyeniden düzenlenmesi ve her çocuğa özel protokol değişikliklerinin yapılması ile radyasyondozu önemli ölçüde azaltılabilir. Radyasyonu azaltmada, kullanılan tomografi aletinin teknikparametre değişiklikleri (tüp akımı, kilovolt piki, masa hızı) iyi bilinmeli ve dikkatliceuygulanmalıdır

Keywords

• bilgisayarlı tomografi,çocukluk çağı,radyasyon

References

1. Berland LL, Smith JK: Multidetector-array CT: once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology. 1998; 209:327–329.
2. Golding SJ, Shrimpton PC: Radiation dose in CT: are we meeting the challenge? Br J Radiol. 2002; 75:1–4.
3. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Hamberg LM, Blake MA, Shepard JA, Saini S: Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology. 2004;230:619–628.
4. Brenner DJ: Estimating cancer risks from pediatric CT: going from the qualitative to the quantitative. Pediatr Radiol. 2002;32:228–233.
5. Mettler FA Jr, Wiest PW, Locken JA, Kelsey CA: CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot. 2000;20:353–359.
6. Ron E: Ionizing radiation and cancer risks: evidence from epidemiology. Pediatr Radiol. 2002;32:232–237.
7. Strom DJ, Cameron JR: Is it useful to assess annual effective doses that are less than 100 mSv? Radiat Prot Dosimetry.2002;98:239–245.
8. Frush DP, Donelly LF, Rosen NS: Computed tomography and radiation risks. What pediatric health care providers should know. Pediatrics. 2003;112:951–957.

9. Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Preston DL, Vaeth M, Mabuchi K. Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, part I. Cancer: 1950–1990. Radiat Res. 1996;146:1–27.
10. Ware DE, Huda W, Mergo PJ, Litwiller AL. Radiation effective doses to patients undergoing abdominal CT examinations. Radiology. 1999;210:645–650.
11. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations (BEIR V), National Research Council. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. Washington, DC: National Academy Press 1990; 1–436.
12. Hollingsworth C, Frush DP, Cross M, Lucaya J. Helical CT of the body: a survey of techniques used for pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180:401–406.
13. Slovis TL. Conference on the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept in pediatric CT: intelligent dose reduction. Pediatr Radiol 2002; 32:217–313.
14. Cascade PN, Webster EW, Kazerooni EA. Ineffective use of radiology: the hidden cost. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170:561–564.
15. Kaiser S, Frenckner B, Jorulf HK. Suspected appendicitis in children—a prospective randomized study. Radiology. 2002; 223:633–638.
16. Morris KT, Kavanagh M, Hansen P, et al. The rational use of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis of appendicitis. Am J Surg 2002; 183:547–550.
17. Zhu X, Yu J, Huang Z. Low-dose chest CT: optimizing radiation protection for patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183 (3):809–816.
18. Prasad SR, Wittram C, Shepard JA, McLoud T, Rhea J. Standard-dose and 50%-reduced dose chest CT: comparing the effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179 (2): 461–465.
19. Karabulut N, Toru M, Gelebek V, Gulsun M, Ariyurek OM. Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose helical CT in the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. Eur Radiol 2002; 12 :2764– 2769.
20. Nawa T, Nakagawa T, Kusano S, et al. Lung cancer screening using low-dose spiral CT: results of baseline and 1-year follow-up studies. Chest 2002; 122 :15–20.
21. Rusinek H, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, et al. Pulmonary nodule detection: low-dose versus conventional CT. Radiology 1998; 209:243–249.
22. Hagtvedt T, Aalokken TM, Notthellen J, Kolbenstvedt A. A new low-dose CT examination compared with standard-dose CT in the diagnosis of acute sinusitis. Eur Radiol 2003; 13 :976–980.
23. Karabulut N, Akti U, Kazil S. Comparison of low dose and standard dose CT in the evaluation of inflammatory diseases of paranasal sinuses. Tani Girisim Radyol 2003; 9 :315–320.
24. Tack D, Widelec J, De Maertelaer V, et al. Comparison between low-dose and standard-dose multidetector CT in patients with suspected chronic sinusitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181 :939–944.
25. Metin K, Arslan A, Akgoz Y, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of low dose paranasal sinus CT examination. Tani Girisim Radyol 2003; 9 :321–326.
26. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2003; 229 :775–781.
27. Hamm M, Knopfle E, Wartenberg S,Wawroschek F, Weckermann D, Harzmann R. Low dose unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute flank pain. J Urol 2002; 167:1687–1691.
28. Spielmann AL, Heneghan JP, Lee LJ, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC. Decreasing the radiation dose for renal stone CT: a feasibility study of single- and multidetector CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178 :1058–1062.
29. Heneghan JP, McGuire KA, Leder RA, DeLong DM, Yoshizumi T, Nelson RC. Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology 2003; 229 :575–580.
30. Hopper KD, King SH, Lobell ME, TenHave TR, Weaver JS. The breast: in-plane x-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT-shielding with bismuth radioprotective garments. Radiology 1997; 205 :853–858.
31. Fricke BL, Donnelly LF, Frush DP, et al. In-plane bismuth breast shield for pediatric CT: effects on radiation dose and image quality using experimental and clinical data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180 :407–411.
32. Donnely LF, Frush DP. Pediatric multidetector CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41 :637–655.
33. Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS, et al. Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single- detector helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176 :303–306.
34. Singh S, Kalra MK, Moore MA, et al. Dose reduction and compliance with pediatric CT protocols adapted to patient size, clinical indication, and number of prior studies. Radiology 2009; 252 :200–208.
35. Lucaya J, Piqueras J, Garcia-Peña P, et al. Low-dose high- resolution CT of the chest in children and young adults: dose, cooperation, artifact incidence, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175 :985–992.
36. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT: radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002; 22 :1541–1553.
37. Karabulut N, Ariyurek M. Düşük doz BT: üniversite hastanelerindeki stratejiler ve pratik uygulamalar. Diagn Interv Radiol 2006; 12 :3–8.
38. Brix G, Nagel HD, Stamm G, et al. Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 2003; 13 :1979–1991.
39. Van der Molen AJ, Geleijns J. Overranging in multisection CT: quantification and relative contribution to dose- comparison of four 16-section CT scanners. Radiology 2007; 242 :208–216.
40. Martinsen AC, Saether HK, Olsen DR, Skaane P, Olerud HM. Reduction in dose from CT examinations of liver lesions with a new postprocessing filter: a ROC phantom study. Acta Radiol 2008; 49 :303–309.
41. Chae EJ, Song JW, Seo JB, Krauss B, Jang YM, Song KS. Clinical utility of dual energy CT in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules: initial experience. Radiology 2008; 249 :671–681.