Baş-Boyun, Toraks ve Batın Bölgelerinde Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Çekimi Sırasında Radyasyon Maruziyeti: Korunma Stratejileri ve Doz Değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada baş-boyun, toraks ve batın bölgelerinden yapılan bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) taramalarında organ absorbe radyasyon dozları Termoluminesans Dozimetreler (TLD’ler) ile deneysel olarak ölçülmüştür. Amaç, kritik organ olarak bilinen dozların değerlendirilmesi ve radyasyondan korunma stratejilerinin geliştirilmesidir. Baş-boyun bölgesindeki organlar, genellikle orta seviyelerde dozlar almış olup, özellikle Glandula Thyroidea (24.95 ± 0.525 mGy) ve Glandula Parotidea (28.49 ± 1.34 mGy) gibi kritik organlar, uzun süreli sağlık etkilerine karşı duyarlıdır. Toraks bölgesindeki dozlar, Pulmonis (5.86 ± 0.1 mGy) ve Mammaria dextra (6.52 ± 0.7 mGy) gibi organlarda daha düşüktür, ancak düşük dozların kardiyovasküler sağlık üzerindeki potansiyel etkileri dikkate alınmalıdır. Batın bölgesinde ise, karaciğer (15.87 ± 1.6 mGy) ve böbrekler (15.26 ± 0.6 mGy) gibi organlar daha yüksek dozlar almıştır, bu da uzun vadeli kanser risklerinin arttığını göstermektedir. Bu bulgular, baş-boyun ve batın bölgelerinde organ koruma stratejilerinin önemini vurgulamaktadır. Sonuç olarak, elde edilen doz verileri, radyasyon maruziyetini minimize etmek için hastalar üzerinde daha dikkatli doz kontrolü yapılması gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca, TLDlerin kullanımı, BT taramalarında güvenli doz ölçümünü sağlamak ve gereksiz radyasyon maruziyetini önlemek için etkili bir yöntem olarak öne çıkmaktadır.

Keywords

• Radyasyondan korunma
• Radyoloji
• Bilgisayarlı Tomografi

Radiation Exposure During Computed Tomography of the Head-Neck, Thorax, and Abdominal Regions: Dose Assessment and Protection Strategies

Abstract

Abstract: In this study, organ-absorbed radiation doses during computed tomography (CT) scans of the head-neck, thorax, and abdominal regions were experimentally measured using Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs). The aim was to evaluate the doses received by critical organs and to develop radiation protection strategies. In the head and neck region, organs generally received moderate levels of radiation, with critical organs such as the thyroid gland (24.95 ± 0.525 mGy) and parotid gland (28.49 ± 1.34 mGy) being particularly sensitive to long-term health effects. In the thoracic region, doses were lower in organs such as the lungs (5.86 ± 0.1 mGy) and right breast (6.52 ± 0.7 mGy); however, the potential impact of even low doses on cardiovascular health should not be overlooked. In the abdominal region, organs such as the liver (15.87 ± 1.6 mGy) and kidneys (15.26 ± 0.6 mGy) received higher doses, indicating an increased long-term risk of cancer. These findings underscore the importance of implementing organ protection strategies, especially in the head-neck and abdominal regions. In conclusion, the obtained dose data suggest that more careful dose control is necessary to minimize radiation exposure in patients. Moreover, the use of TLDs stands out as an effective method for ensuring safe dose measurement during CT scans and preventing unnecessary radiation exposure.

Keywords

• Radiation Protection
• Radiology
• Computed Tomography

References

1. [1] Kalra, M. K., Maher, M. M., Toth, T. L. 2004. Techniques and applications of CT in the trauma patient. Radiology 231(3), 682–694.
2. [2] Huda, W., Ogden, K. M., Sontag, M. 2000. The dose to the eye lens and thyroid gland from diagnostic radiology. Radiology 217(1), 37–42.
3. [3] Brenner, D. J., Hall, E. J. 2007. Computed tomography — An increasing source of radiation exposure. New England Journal of Medicine 357(22), 2277–2284.
4. [4] Hardy, P., Cormack, A., Davies, D. 2021. The use of size-specific dose estimates in pediatric CT scans. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 22(2), 110–118.
5. [5] Zancopè, A., Piccoli, F., Venturini, A. 2025. Monte Carlo simulations in CT dosimetry: A comprehensive review. Physics in Medicine and Biology 70(1), 117–138.
6. [6] Perisinakis, K., Karamitros, P., Sgouros, A. 2005. Organ-specific dose measurements in CT. Physics in Medicine and Biology 50(11), 2741–2750.
7. [7] Günay, C., Pınar, Y., Çolak, İ. 2020. Computed tomography dosimetry and the role of organ-specific dose in minimizing radiation exposure. Journal of Radiological Protection 40(3), 681–689.
8. [8] International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). 2007. The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103.

9. [9] American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). 2010. Size-Specific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in Computed Tomography. Report No. 204. AAPM.
10. [10] Shrimpton, P. C., Wall, B. F., Fisher, E. S. 1981. The tissue-equivalence of the Alderson Rando anthropomorphic phantom for x-rays of diagnostic qualities. Physics in Medicine & Biology 26(1), 133.
11. [11] Tunçman, D., Kesmezacar, F. F., Yeyin, N. et al. 2025. Comprehensive organ-specific radiation dose mapping in coronary angiography using the Alderson Rando phantom: An experimental approach to optimize patient safety. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 112739.
12. [12] Hassan, M., Hossain,S., Siraz, M.M.M. et al. 2025. Occupational radiation exposure analysis in industrial radiography in Bangladesh. Radiation Medicine and Protection 6(2), 107–111.
13. [13] Rehani, M.M., Mataac, M.T., Kaviani, P., Kalra M.K., Li, X. 2025.Are high-dose CT examinations on the rise?. Br J Radiol 98(1174),1596-1605.
14. [14] International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU). 2005. ICRU Report 74: Patient Dosimetry for X Rays Used in Medical Imaging. ICRU Publications.
15. [15] Kirkpatrick, J. P. et al. 2009.Radiation Dose–Volume Effects in the Spinal Cord, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 76(3), 42-49.
16. [16] Huda, W., Ogden, K.M., Khorasani, M.R. 2000. Converting dose-length product to effective dose at CT. Radiology 215(2), 653–658.
17. [17] Kalender, W.A., Schmidt, B., Zankl, M., Schmidt, M. 2009. A PC program for estimating organ dose and effective dose values in computed tomography. European Radiology 19(4), 870–876.
18. [18] Cohnen, M., Fischer, H., Hamacher, J., Lins, E., Modder, U. 2002. CT of the head by use of reduced current and kilovoltage: relationship between image quality and radiation dose. AJNR American Journal of Neuroradiology 23(5), 770–775.
19. [19] Deak, P.D., Smal, Y., Kalender, W.A. 2010. Multisection CT protocols: Sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 257(1), 158–166.
20. [20] Evans, S.H., Davis, R., Cooke, J., Anderson, W. 1989. A Comparison of Radiation Doses to the Breast in Computed Tomographic Chest Examinations for Two Scanning Protocols. Clinical Radiology 40,45-46.
21. [21] McCollough, C. H., Primak, A. N., Braun, N., Kofler, J., Yu, L., Christner, J. 2011. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiologic Clinics of North America 47(1), 27–40.
22. [22] Singh, S., Kalra, M. K., Moore, M. A., et al. 2020. Dose reduction and compliance with pediatric CT protocols adapted to patient size. Pediatric Radiology 50(2), 232–239.
23. [23] Huda, W., Vance, A. 2007. Patient radiation doses from adult and pediatric CT. American Journal of Roentgenology 188(2), 540–546.
24. [24] Gao, Y., Mahmood, U., Liu, T., Quinn, B., Gollub, M.J., Xu, X.G., Dauer, L.T. 2020. Patient-Specific Organ and Effective Dose Estimates in Adult Oncologic CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 214(4), 738-746.
25. [25] Lahham, A., ALMasri, H.2018. Abdomınal Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Taramalarından Radyasyon Dozlarının Tahmini. Radiat Prot Dozimetrisi 182(2), 235-240.
26. [26] Christner, J. A., Kofler, J. M., McCollough, C. H. 2010. Dose reduction in CT: Techniques, practices, and future direction. European Journal of Radiology 76(1), 36–44.
27. [27] Mettler, F. A., Huda, W., Yoshizumi, T. T., Mahesh, M. 2008. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248(1), 254–263.