RENAL COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY PROTOCOL AND RADIATION DOSE IN KIDNEY TRANSPLANT DONORS

Yıl 2021, , 321 - 325, 04.08.2021

Eray Atlı , Abidin Kılınçer , Sadık Uyanık , Umut Öğüşlü , Halime Çevik

https://doi.org/10.18229/kocatepetip.786155

Öz

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the radiation dose parameters of renal computed tomography angiography (RCTA) scans in kidney transplant donors.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: RCTA scans obtained between July 2017 and December 2019 in a tertiary reference hospital were included in this study whose ethics committee approval was obtained retrospectively. CT radiation dose parameters were obtained from the picture archiving and communication system. Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP) values were recorded from the patient dose reports. Effective dose (ED) and scan length (SL) were calculated.
RESULTS: Of the 142 patients who underwent RCTA, 54 % (n = 76) were men and 46 % (n = 66) were women. The mean age of the patients was 43.8 ± 12.5. The second quarter (median) of total DLP and ED values of RCTA scans were 835 mGy.cm and 12.5 mSv, respectively. The mean SL value of unenhanced, arterial, venous and late phase series were 31.4 ± 3, 21.9 ± 3, 32.1 ± 4.5 and 22.7 ± 4.7 cm, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, radiation dose parameters of RCTA scans were lower than the relevant literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renal CT angiography, kidney transplant, radiation dose, volume computed tomography dose index, dose length product

BÖBREK NAKLİ VERİCİLERİNDE RENAL BİLGİSAYARLI TOMOGRAFİ ANJİYOGRAFİ TEKNİĞİ VE RADYASYON DOZU

Öz

AMAÇ: Bu çalışmada amaç, böbrek nakli vericilerinin renal bilgisayarlı tomografi anjiyografi (RBTA) tetkiklerinin radyasyon dozunu saptamaktadır.
GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Etik kurul onayı retrospektif olarak alınan bu çalışmaya 3. basamak hastanede Temmuz 2017 ve Aralık 2019 tarihleri arasında çekilen RBTA tetkikleri dahil edildi. Görüntü arşivleme iletişim sisteminden, BT tetkiklerinin hacimsel BT doz indeksi (Volume CT dose index, CTDIvol) ve tarama alanı boyunca alınan doz (dose length product, DLP) değerleri hasta doz raporlarından kaydedildi. Etkin doz (ED) ve tarama uzunluğu (TU) hesaplandı.
BULGULAR: RBTA çekilmiş 142 hastanın % 54 (n=76)'ü erkek, % 46 (n=66)'sı kadındı. RBTA'sı elde edilen hastaların ortalama yaşı 43,8±12,5'dir. RBTA tetkiklerinin ikinci çeyrek (ortanca) toplam tarama alanı boyunca alınan doz (DLP) ve ED değerleri sırasıyla 835 mGy.cm ve 12,5 mSv'dir. Kontrastsız, arteryel, venöz ve geç faz çekimlerin ortalama TU değerleri sırasıyla 31,4±3, 21,9±3, 32,1±4,5 ve 22,7±4,7 cm'dir.
SONUÇ: Çalışmamızda RBTA tetkiklerinin radyasyon dozu parametreleri literatüre göre daha düşüktür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renal BT anjiyografi, böbrek nakli, radyasyon dozu, CTDIvol, DLP

Kaynakça

• 1. Kute VB, Prasad N, Shah PR, Modi PR. Kidney exchange transplantation current status, an update and future perspectives. World J Transplant. 2018;8(3):52-60.
• 2. Purnell TS, Luo X, Cooper LA, et al. Association of Race and Ethnicity With Live Donor Kidney Transplantation in the United States From 1995 to 2014. JAMA. 2018;319(1):49-61.
• 3. Roi GS, Mosconi G, Totti V, et al. Renal function and physical fitness after 12-mo supervised training in kidney transplant recipients. World J Transplant. 2018;8(1):13-22.
• 4. Koo DD, Welsh KI, McLaren AJ, Roake JA, Morris PJ, Fuggle SV. Cadaver versus living donor kidneys: impact of donor factors on antigen induction before transplantation. Kidney Int. 1999;56(4):1551-9.
• 5. Lowell JA, Brennan DC, Shenoy S, et al. Living-unrelated renal transplantation provides comparable results to living-related renal transplantation: a 12-year single-center experience. Surgery.1996;119(5):538-43.
• 6. Truog RD. The ethics of organ donation by living donors. New Engl J Med. 2005;353(5):444-6.
• 7. Price D. Living kidney donation in Europe: legal and ethical perspectives--the EUROTOLD Project. Transpl Int. 1994;7(1):665-7.
• 8. Davis CL, Delmonico FL. Living-donor kidney transplantation: a review of the current practices for the live donor. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16(7):2098-110.
• 9. Ferhatoglu MF, Atli E, Gurkan A, Kebudi A. Vascular variations of the kidney, retrospective analysis of computed tomography images of ninety-one laparoscopic donor nephrectomies, and comparison of computed tomography images with perioperative findings. Folia Morphol. 2019.
• 10. Sahani DV, Rastogi N, Greenfield AC, et al. Multi-detector row CT in evaluation of 94 living renal donors by readers with varied experience. Radiology. 2005;235(3):905-10.
• 11. 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. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(4):881-9.
• 12. Hussain SM, Kock MC, JN IJ, Pattynama PM, Hunink MG, Krestin GP. MR imaging: a "one-stop shop" modality for preoperative evaluation of potential living kidney donors. Radiographics. 2003;23(2):505-20.
• 13. Kapoor A, Kapoor A, Mahajan G, Singh A. Multispiral CT angiography of renal arteries of live potential renal donors : A review of 118 cases. Transplantation. 2004;14(2):199-203.
• 14. Chai JW, Lee W, Yin YH, et al. CT angiography for living kidney donors: accuracy, cause of misinterpretation and prevalence of variation. Korean J Radiol. 2008;9(4):333-9.
• 15. Holden A, Smith A, Dukes P, Pilmore H, Yasutomi M. Assessment of 100 live potential renal donors for laparoscopic nephrectomy with multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology. 2005;237(3):973-80.
• 16. Kawamoto S, Montgomery RA, Lawler LP, Horton KM, Fishman EK. Multidetector CT angiography for preoperative evaluation of living laparoscopic kidney donors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180(6):1633-8.
• 17. Nawfel RD, Judy PF, Schleipman AR, Silverman SG. Patient radiation dose at CT urography and conventional urography. Radiology. 2004;232(1):126-32.
• 18. Sahani DV, Kalva SP, Hahn PF, Saini S. 16-MDCT angiography in living kidney donors at various tube potentials: impact on image quality and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(1):115-20.
• 19. Davarpanah AH, Pahade JK, Cornfeld D, Ghita M, Kulkarni S, Israel GM. CT angiography in potential living kidney donors: 80 kVp versus 120 kVp. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(5):W753-60.
• 20. Ghonge NP, Gadanayak S, Rajakumari V. MDCT evaluation of potential living renal donor, prior to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: What the transplant surgeon wants to know? Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2014;24(4):367-78.
• 21. Zamboni GA, Romero JY, Raptopoulos VD. Combined vascular-excretory phase MDCT angiography in the preoperative evaluation of renal donors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(1):145-50.
• 22. Schmid D. Computed tomography (CT) scan examinations in Turkey 2008-2015. 2018; https://www.statista.com/statistics/862506/computed-tomography-scan-examinations-in-turkey/.Erişim 25.07.2020.
• 23. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet. 2004;363(9406):345-51.
• 24. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2012;380(9840):499-505.
• 25. Schauer DA, Linton OW. NCRP Report No. 160, Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, medical exposure--are we doing less with more, and is there a role for health physicists? Health Phys. 2009;97(1):1-5.
• 26. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology. 2004;230(3):619-28.
• 27. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM, Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics. 2006;26(2):503-12.
• 28. Strauss KJ, Goske MJ, Kaste SC, et al. Image gently: Ten steps you can take to optimize image quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(4):868-73.
• 29. Badawy MK, Galea M, Mong KS, U P. Computed tomography overexposure as a consequence of extended scan length. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2015;59(5):586-9.