Patients undergoing recurrent CT exams: assessment of patients with non-malignant diseases, reasons for imaging and imaging appropriateness

What proportion of CT scan patients are alive or deceased after 10 years?

PURPOSE

When discussing radiation risks for patients who undergo many CT examinations, some question the risks, believing that most of these patients are already very sick and likely to die within a few years, thus negating worry about radiation risk. This study seeks to evaluate the validity of this notion.

METHODS

In this retrospective single large-hospital study, patients who received CT exams in 2013 were sorted into four cumulative effective dose (CED) groups: Group A (>0 to <10 mSv), Group B (10 to <50 mSv), Group C (50 to < 100 mSv), and Group D (≥100 mSv). The death rates of patients in each group were analyzed, up to December 2023.

RESULTS

36,545 patients underwent CT examinations in 2013 (mean age, 56 ± 20 years, 51.4 % men). Death rates for all dose groups peaked in the year of imaging or 1 year after. At one year after imaging, Group D had 6.7 times and Group C had 4.3 times the death rate of Group A. However, a significant portion of these patients are alive after 10 years, with 1324/2756 patients (48.0 %) in Group C and 282/769 patients (36.7 %) in Group D with the potential to face radiation effects.

CONCLUSIONS

While it is true that patients receiving relatively higher doses (≥50 mSv) are more likely to die within the first two years of receiving such doses, nearly one-third to half remain alive a decade after their CT scans, potentially facing the effects of radiation. This knowledge may help policymakers and practitioners.

Impact and effect of imaging referral guidelines on patients and radiology services: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to offer a comprehensive overview and explore the associated outcomes from imaging referral guidelines on various key stakeholders, such as patients and radiologists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted in Medline, Embase and Web of Science to retrieve citations published between 2013 and 2023. The search was constructed using medical subject headings and keywords. Only full-text articles and reviews written in English were included. The quality of the included papers was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis was undertaken for the selected articles.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4384 records. Following the abstract, full-text screening, and removal of duplication, 31 studies of varying levels of quality were included in the final analysis. Imaging referral guidelines from the American College of Radiology were most commonly used. Clinical decision support systems were the most evaluated mode of intervention, either integrated or standalone. Interventions showed reduced patient radiation doses and waiting times for imaging. There was a general reduction in radiology workload and utilisation of diagnostic imaging. Low-value imaging utilisation decreased with an increase in the appropriateness of imaging referrals and ratings and cost savings. Clinical effectiveness was maintained during the intervention period without notable adverse consequences.

CONCLUSION

Using evidence-based imaging referral guidelines improves the quality of healthcare and outcomes while reducing healthcare costs. Imaging referral guidelines are one essential component of improving the value of radiology in the healthcare system.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

There is a need for broader dissemination of imaging referral guidelines to healthcare providers globally in tandem with the harmonisation of the application of these guidelines to improve the overall value of radiology within the healthcare system.

KEY POINTS

The application of imaging referral guidelines has an impact and effect on patients, radiologists, and health policymakers. The adoption of imaging referral guidelines in clinical practice can impact healthcare costs and improve healthcare quality and outcomes. Implementing imaging referral guidelines contributes to the attainment of value-based radiology.

Optimisation of protection in the medical exposure of recurrent adult patients due to computed tomography procedures: development of recurrent exposures reference levels

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence (1 year) and the cumulative incidence (3 years) of the condition of patients accruing cumulative effective doses (CED) of ≥ 100 mSv and their variability among different hospitals. To establish and validate a reference level for the CED in patients with recurrent exposures (RERL) and provide a RERL value.

METHODS

Data of CT exposure was collected in 9 similar hospitals. The database included 294,222 patient*years who underwent 442,278 CT exams in 3 years. The incidence proportion of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv in a given year (I100;1) and the 3-year cumulative incidence of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv over 3 consecutive years (I100;3) were calculated and compared among different institutions.

RESULTS

I100;1 ranged from a minimum of 0.1% to a maximum of 5.1%. The percentage of recurrent patients was quite uniform among centres ranging from 23 to 38%. The I100;3 ranged from a minimum of 1.1 to 11.4%. There was a strong positive correlation between the third quartile values of yearly CED and yearly incidence (r = 0.90; R2 = 0.81; p < 0.0001). RERL value in our study was found at 34.0 mSv.

CONCLUSION

The management of patients with recurrent exposures is highly variable among hospitals leading to a 50-fold variation in I100;1 and to a tenfold variation in I100;3. RERL could be established and used by taking as a RERL quantity the CED and as a RERL value the 75th percentile of the third quartiles of the distribution of the yearly CED obtained by surveying different hospitals.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This is the first ever multicentre study that quantifies recurrent exposures in terms of incidence and cumulative incidence of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv. RERL establishment and use could benefit the optimisation of radioprotection of patients with recurrent exposures.

KEY POINTS

This is the first multicentre study estimating yearly incidence and 3-year cumulative incidence of patients with cumulative effective doses ≥ 100 mSv. In this study, a 50-fold inter centre variation between the maximum (5.1%) and the minimum value (0.1%) of yearly incidence of patients with cumulative effective doses ≥ 100 mSv was reported. The range of the 3-year cumulative incidence extended from 1.1 to 11.4% (a tenfold variation) The third quartile of the yearly cumulative effective doses in a centre showed a strong positive correlation with the yearly incidence of patients with cumulative effective doses ≥ 100 mSv, with a potential of being used to set reference levels for recurrent exposures.

Dose, dose, dose, but where is the patient dose?

The article reviews the historical developments in radiation dose metrices in medical imaging. It identifies the good, the bad, and the ugly aspects of current-day metrices. The actions on shifting focus from International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Reference-Man-based population-average phantoms to patient-specific computational phantoms have been proposed and discussed. Technological developments in recent years involving AI-based automatic organ segmentation and 'near real-time' Monte Carlo dose calculations suggest the feasibility and advantage of obtaining patient-specific organ doses. It appears that the time for ICRP and other international organizations to embrace 'patient-specific' dose quantity representing risk may have finally come. While the existing dose metrices meet specific demands, emphasis needs to be also placed on making radiation units understandable to the medical community.

Cumulative radiation exposure from multimodality recurrent imaging of CT, fluoroscopically guided intervention, and nuclear medicine

OBJECTIVES

To assess cumulative effective dose (CED) over a 4-year period in patients undergoing multimodality recurrent imaging at a major hospital in the USA.

METHODS

CED from CT, fluoroscopically guided intervention (FGI), and nuclear medicine was analyzed in consecutive exams in a tertiary care center in 2018-2021. Patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv were classified by age and body habitus (underweight, healthy weight, overweight, obese), as per body mass index percentiles < 5th, 5th to < 85th, 85th to < 95th, and ≥ 95th (age 2-19 years), and its ranges < 18.5, 18.5-24.9, 25-29.9, and ≥ 30 (≥ 20 years), respectively.

RESULTS

Among a total of 205,425 patients, 5.7% received CED ≥ 100 mSv (mean 184 mSv, maximum 1165 mSv) and their ages were mostly 50-64 years (34.1%), followed by 65-74 years (29.8%), ≥ 75 years (19.5%), 20-49 years (16.3%), and ≤ 19 years (0.29%). Body habitus in decreasing occurrence was obese (38.6%), overweight (31.9%), healthy weight (27.5%), and underweight (2.1%). Classification by dose indicated 172 patients (≥ 500 mSv) and 3 (≥ 1000 mSv). In comparison, 5.3% of 189,030 CT patients, 1.6% of 18,963 FGI patients, and 0.19% of 41,401 nuclear-medicine patients received CED ≥ 100 mSv from a single modality.

CONCLUSIONS

The study of total dose from CT, FGI, and nuclear medicine of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv indicates major (89%) contribution of CT to CED with 70% of cohort being obese and overweight, and 64% of cohort aged 50-74 years.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Multimodality recurrent exams are common and there is a lack of information on patient cumulative radiation exposure. This study attempts to address this lacuna and has the potential to motivate actions to improve the justification process for enhancing patient safety.

KEY POINTS

• In total, 5.7% of patients undergoing multimodality recurrent imaging (CT, fluoroscopically guided intervention, nuclear medicine) incurred a dose of ≥ 100 mSv. • Mean dose was 184 mSv, with 15 to 18 times contribution from CT than that from fluoroscopically guided intervention or nuclear medicine. • In total, 70% of those who received ≥ 100mSv were either overweight or obese.

Recurrent medical imaging exposures for the care of patients: one way forward

Medical imaging is both valuable and essential in the care of patients. Much of this imaging depends on ionizing radiation with attendant responsibilities for judicious use when performing an examination. This responsibility applies in settings of both individual as well as multiple (recurrent) imaging with associated repeated radiation exposures. In addressing the roles and responsibilities of the medical communities in the paradigm of recurrent imaging, both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) have issued position statements, each affirmed by other organizations. The apparent difference in focus and approach has resulted in a lack of clarity and continued debate. Aiming towards a coherent approach in dealing with radiation exposure in recurrent imaging, the IAEA convened a panel of experts, the purpose of which was to identify common ground and reconcile divergent perspectives. The effort has led to clarifying recommendations for radiation exposure aspects of recurrent imaging, including the relevance of patient agency and the provider-patient covenant in clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: An increasing awareness, generating some lack of clarity and divergence in perspectives, with patients receiving relatively high radiation doses (e.g., ≥ 100 mSv) from recurrent imaging warrants a multi-stakeholder accord for the benefit of patients, providers, and the imaging community. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent medical imaging can result in an accumulation of exposures which exceeds 100 milli Sieverts. • Professional organizations have different perspectives on roles and responsibilities for recurrent imaging. • An expert panel reconciles differing perspectives for addressing radiation exposure from recurrent medical imaging.

Is a one percent occurrence of high-dose patients significant?

Risk-free society is utopian. We come across risks in everyday life, and we use probabilities to get a feel of how risky a situation is. Risk probability numbers of around 1% are comforting, but an intercomparison of numbers among various low risks in popular situations can be enlightening. In this article, we compare risks of complications or death in several surgeries and risks in commercial air travel with risks for patients getting cumulative effective dose (CED) of 100 mSv or more, as the latter is a hot and controversial topic currently. The analysis shows that many common surgeries are a few tens or hundreds of times less risky than the risk from a 100 mSv dose, even though the former often frightens us more. Despite there being a much higher chance of developing cancer from radiation than being involved in a commercial plane accident, there is much less emphasis on patient radiation safety than aviation safety. Further, a look at the system of control on prescription drugs indicates that there is much to learn for policy planning. This analysis may help the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in their review of recommendations.

Features and functions of decision support systems for appropriate diagnostic imaging: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic imaging decision support (DI-DS) systems could be effective tools for reducing inappropriate diagnostic imaging examinations. Since effective design and evaluation of these systems requires in-depth understanding of their features and functions, the present study aims to map the existing literature on DI-DS systems to identify features and functions of these systems.

METHODS

The search was performed using Scopus, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and was limited to 2000 to 2021. Analytical studies, descriptive studies, reviews and book chapters that explicitly addressed the functions or features of DI-DS systems were included.

RESULTS

A total of 6,046 studies were identified. Out of these, 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. From these, 22 functions and 22 features were identified. Some of the identified features were: visibility, content chunking/grouping, deployed as a multidisciplinary program, clinically valid and relevant feedback, embedding current evidence, and targeted recommendations. And, some of the identified functions were: displaying an appropriateness score, recommending alternative or more appropriate imaging examination(s), providing recommendations for next diagnostic steps, and providing safety alerts.

CONCLUSIONS

The set of features and functions obtained in the present study can provide a basis for developing well-designed DI-DS systems, which could help to improve adherence to diagnostic imaging guidelines, minimize unnecessary costs, and improve the outcome of care through appropriate diagnosis and on-time care delivery.

Assessment of cumulative cancer risk attributable to diagnostic X-ray radiation: a large cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of cancer induced by diagnostic X-ray exposure in multiple radiological examinations and to explore the relevant influences to provide a reference for rational usage of X-ray examinations.

METHODS

Data for all adult patients who underwent X-ray examinations from August 2004 to April 2020 in a general hospital was collected, including sex, age, primary diagnosis, and X-ray examination. Based on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations report, age and sex and effective dose for a single X-ray examination were used to calculate the lifetime attributable risk (LAR). Patients whose cancer LAR values were in the top 5% were considered to have a high cancer risk; the factors influencing this status were explored by using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 1,143,413 patients with 3,301,286 X-ray examinations were included. LARs of cancer incidence and death were < 0.2% and < 0.13% among 95% of patients and they were > 1% among 0.21% and 0.07% of patients. High risks of incidence and death were significantly associated with corrected exposure frequency (odds ratio [OR], 1.080 and 1.080), sex (OR, male vs. female, 0.421 and 0.372), and year of birth (OR, 1.088 and 1.054), with all p values < 0.001. Among 20 disease categories, congenital disease (OR, 3.792 and 4.024), genitourinary disease (OR, 3.608 and 3.202), digestive disease (OR, 3.247 and 3.272), and tumor disease (OR, 2.706 and 2.767) had the strongest associations with high risks of incidence and death (all p values < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer risk induced by diagnostic X-ray examinations can be considered acceptable clinically. Patients having certain diseases are potentially at a relative higher risk due to recurrent examinations.

KEY POINTS

• It was the first large-scale investigation of cumulative X-ray exposure in China, involving more than 3.3 million X-ray scans of all types of diagnostic X-ray examinations for about 1.1 million patients during the past 16 years. • The study revealed that the incidence risk of cancer induced by X-ray-related examinations was 0.01% on average, which was substantially lower than that of cancer induced by non-X-ray radiation. The risk could be considered acceptable clinically. • Patients having certain diseases were potentially at a relatively higher cancer risk due to recurrent X-ray examinations. The cumulative effect of X-ray exposure could not be ignored and was worthy of attention.

A feasibility study of different GSI noise indexes and concentrations of contrast medium in hepatic CT angiography of overweight patients: image quality, radiation dose, and iodine intake

PURPOSE

To conduct a comparative study of image quality, radiation dose, and iodine intake in hepatic computed tomographic angiography (CTA) of overweight patients with different Gemstone Spectral Imaging (GSI) noise indexes combined with different concentrations of contrast medium.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety patients with a body mass index of ≥ 25 kg/m² were divided into three groups (A, B and C), each with 30 patients. The three groups underwent hepatic CTA with different NI of 7, 11 and 15, respectively, and were injected with different iodine concentrations of 370, 350 and 320 mgI/mL, respectively. Five sets of images at 40-60 keV (interval, 5 keV) were reconstructed in each group. The CT value, image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and subjective score of the hepatic artery and vein, and portal vein in different monochromatic image sets were analyzed to select the optimal energy level in each group. The differences in CT value, image noise, CNR and a subjective score of hepatic artery and vein, portal vein in the optimal monochromatic images among the three groups were compared, the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose-length product (DLP) were recorded, and the effective dose and iodine intake were calculated.

RESULTS

The 40 keV was determined to be the optimal energy level for the monochromatic image sets in each group. No significant group differences were noted in the CT value, image noise, CNR, and subjective image scores of the hepatic artery and vein, and portal vein for the optimal monochromatic images (P > 0.05). Compared with group A, the effective dose and iodine intake in group B were reduced by 50.18% and 9.3%, and by 58.12% and 14.23% in group C, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A low-concentration contrast medium combined with a high-noise GSI index in hepatic CTA of overweight patients can reduce the radiation dose and iodine intake while ensuring image quality.

Identification and characterization of patients being exposed to computed-tomography associated radiation-doses above 100 mSv in a real-life setting

Rationale and objectives

Patients receiving high cumulative effective doses (CED) from recurrent computed tomography (CT) in a real-life setting are not well identified. Evaluation of causes and patient characteristics may help to define individuals potentially at risk of radiation-induced secondary malignancies.

Materials and methods

Patients who received a CED > 100 mSv from CT scans during October 2012 and April 2020 at a tertiary university center were identified with the help of a radiological radiation dose monitoring system. The primary disease and referral diagnosis, number of CT exams, time period, age, BMI and gender distribution of the 1000 patients with the highest CED were analysed.

Results

3431 patients had a CED of more than 100 mSv, which corresponded to 2.75% of all patients who received a CT exam. From the 1000 patients with the highest CED, mean number of CT exams per patient was 14.6, mean CED was 257 mSv (SD 98, range 177-1339). Mean age of patients was 63.9 years (SD 10.6), male to female ratio 3:2, and mean BMI 28.7 kg/m2 (SD 5.5). 728 (72.9%) patients had cancer. The leading primary diagnosis was liver cirrhosis in 197 patients and 103 patients had a liver transplantation. In patients with liver cirrhosis, 750 exams were indicated for the follow-up of the disease, 662 for the clarification of an acute clinical condition, and 202 for CT-guided stereotactic radiofrequency ablation.

Conclusion

Recurrent CT scans of patients with cancer, liver cirrhosis and liver transplantation may lead to critically high CED.

Justification of CT practices across Europe: results of a survey of national competent authorities and radiology societies

Objectives

Published literature on justification of computed tomography (CT) examinations in Europe is sparse but demonstrates consistent sub-optimal application. As part of the EU initiated CT justification project, this work set out to capture CT justification practices across Europe.

Methods

An electronic questionnaire consisting of mostly closed multiple-choice questions was distributed to national competent authorities and to presidents of European radiology societies in EU member states as well as Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and the UK (n = 31).

Results

Fifty-one results were received from 30 European countries. Just 47% (n = 24) stated that advance justification of individual CT examinations is performed by a medical practitioner. Radiologists alone mostly (n = 27, 53%) perform daily justification of CT referrals although this is a shared responsibility in many countries. Imaging referral guidelines are widely available although just 13% (n = 6) consider them in daily use. Four countries (Cyprus, Ireland, Sweden, UK) reported having them embedded within clinical decision support systems. Justification of new practices with CT is mostly regulated (77%) although three countries (Belgium, Iceland and Portugal) reported not having any national system in place for generic justification. Health screening with CT was reported by seven countries as part of approved screening programmes and by eight countries outside. When performed, CT justification audits were reported to improve CT justification rates.

Conclusions

CT justification practices vary across Europe with less than 50% using advance justification and a minority having clinical decision support systems in place. CT for health screening purposes is not currently widely used in Europe.

Low-Dose Computed Tomography Scanning Protocols for Online Adaptive Proton Therapy of Head-and-Neck Cancers

PURPOSE

To evaluate the suitability of low-dose CT protocols for online plan adaptation of head-and-neck patients.

METHODS

We acquired CT scans of a head phantom with protocols corresponding to CT dose index volume CTDI_vol in the range of 4.2-165.9 mGy. The highest value corresponds to the standard protocol used for CT simulations of 10 head-and-neck patients included in the study. The minimum value corresponds to the lowest achievable tube current of the GE Discovery RT scanner used for the study. For each patient and each low-dose protocol, the noise relative to the standard protocol, derived from phantom images, was applied to a virtual CT (vCT). The vCT was obtained from a daily CBCT scan corresponding to the fraction with the largest anatomical changes. We ran an established adaptive workflow twice for each low-dose protocol using a high-quality daily vCT and the corresponding low-dose synthetic vCT. For a relative comparison of the adaptation efficacy, two adapted plans were recalculated in the high-quality vCT and evaluated with the contours obtained through deformable registration of the planning CT. We also evaluated the accuracy of dose calculation in low-dose CT volumes using the standard CT protocol as reference.

RESULTS

The maximum differences in D₉₈ between low-dose protocols and the standard protocol for the high-risk and low-risk CTV were found to be 0.6% and 0.3%, respectively. The difference in OAR sparing was up to 3%. The Dice similarity coefficient between propagated contours obtained with low-dose and standard protocols was above 0.982. The mean 2%/2 mm gamma pass rate for the lowest-dose image, using the standard protocol as reference, was found to be 99.99%.

CONCLUSION

The differences between low-dose protocols and the standard scanning protocol were marginal. Thus, low-dose CT protocols are suitable for online adaptive proton therapy of head-and-neck cancers. As such, considering scanning protocols used in our clinic, the imaging dose associated with online adaption of head-and-neck cancers treated with protons can be reduced by a factor of 40.

The natural language processing of radiology requests and reports of chest imaging: Comparing five transformer models’ multilabel classification and a proof-of-concept study

Background

Radiology requests and reports contain valuable information about diagnostic findings and indications, and transformer-based language models are promising for more accurate text classification.

Methods

In a retrospective study, 2256 radiologist-annotated radiology requests (8 classes) and reports (10 classes) were divided into training and testing datasets (90% and 10%, respectively) and used to train 32 models. Performance metrics were compared by model type (LSTM, Bertje, RobBERT, BERT-clinical, BERT-multilingual, BERT-base), text length, data prevalence, and training strategy. The best models were used to predict the remaining 40,873 cases’ categories of the datasets of requests and reports.

Results

The RobBERT model performed the best after 4000 training iterations, resulting in AUC values ranging from 0.808 [95% CI (0.757–0.859)] to 0.976 [95% CI (0.956–0.996)] for the requests and 0.746 [95% CI (0.689–0.802)] to 1.0 [95% CI (1.0–1.0)] for the reports. The AUC for the classification of normal reports was 0.95 [95% CI (0.922–0.979)]. The predicted data demonstrated variability of both diagnostic yield for various request classes and request patterns related to COVID-19 hospital admission data.

Conclusion

Transformer-based natural language processing is feasible for the multilabel classification of chest imaging request and report items. Diagnostic yield varies with the information in the requests.

Accounting for radiation exposure from previous CT exams while deciding on the next exam: What do referring clinicians think?

PURPOSE

To obtain clinicians' views of the need to account for radiation exposure from previous CT scans and the advisability of a regulatory mechanism to control the number of CT scans for an individual patient.

METHODS

A convenience survey was conducted by emailing a link to a three-question electronic survey to clinicians in many countries, mostly through radiology and radiation protection contacts.

RESULTS

505 responses were received from 24 countries. 293 respondents (58%) understand that current regulations do not limit the number of CT scans that can be prescribed for a single patient in a year. When asked whether there should be a regulation to limit the number of CT scans that can be prescribed for a single patient in one year, only a small fraction (143, 28%) answered 'No', 182 (36%) answered 'Maybe' and 166 (33%) answered 'Yes'. Most respondents (337; 67%) think that radiation risk should form part of the consideration when deciding whether to request a CT exam. A minority (138; 27%) think the decision should be based only on the medical indication for the CT exam. Comparison among the 4 countries (South Korea, Hungary, USA and Canada) with the largest number of respondents indicated wide variations in responses.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of the surveyed clinicians consider radiation risk, in addition to clinical factors, when prescribing CT exams. Most respondents are in favor of, or would consider, regulation to control the number of CT scans that could be performed on a patient annually.

Patients undergoing multiple 18F-FDG PET/CT exams: Assessment of frequency, dose and disease classification

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the frequency, demographics, primary disease and cumulative effective dose of patients undergoing two or more 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations in a year.

METHODS

In a retrospective study performed at a tertiary-care hospital, patients who underwent ≥2 18F-FDG PET/CT scans in a calendar year were identified for two consecutive years. The CT radiation dose was calculated using dose-length-product and sex-specific conversion factors. The primary malignancy of patients was retrieved from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

10,714 18F-FDG PET/CT exams were performed for 6,831 unique patients in 2 years, yielding an average of 1.6 exams per patient. The maximum number of 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations any patient underwent in a single year was seven. 20.9% patients had ≥2 18F-FDG PET/CT exams in any single year. Thirty nine percent patients in the cohort were below 60 years age. The median dose for 18F-FDG PET/CT examination was 25.1 mSv and maximum value reaching 1.7 to 2.9 times the median value. Cumulative effective dose (CED) was≥100 mSv in 12-13% of the patients. The cumulative dose for both years combined demonstrated the 25th percentile, 50th percentile and 75th percentile as well as the mean to be over 100 mSv, with the 25th percentile being 109 mSv. The dominant primary malignancies contributing to serial 18F-FDG PET/CTs in decreasing frequency were melanoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), gastrointestinal cancer, breast cancer and Hodgkin's lymphoma.

CONCLUSIONS

A sizeable number of patients undergo≥2 18F-FDG PET/CT exams with one out of every eight patients receiving cumulative dose≥100 mSv and that includes patients with long-life expectancy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The study found that one of five patients had≥2 18F-FDG PET/CT exams in a calendar year, one of four patients in two years and one of eight patients received cumulative dose≥100 mSv. Top malignancies associated with serial imaging in decreasing order of frequency included melanoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), gastrointestinal cancer, breast cancer and Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Comparison of patient effective doses from multiple CT examinations based on different calculation methods

The aim of this study is to compare effective dose (E) estimations based on different methods for patients with recurrent computed tomography (CT) examinations. Seventeen methods were used to determine the E of each phase as well as the total E of the CT examination. These included three groups of estimations: based on the use of published E, calculated from typical or patient-specific values of volume computed tomography dose index (CTDI_vol) and dose-length product (DLP) multiplied by conversion coefficients, and based on patient-specific calculations with use of software. The E from a single phase of the examination varied with a ratio from 1.3 to 6.8 for small size patients, from 1.2 to 6.5 for normal size patients, and from 1.7 up to 18.1 for large size patients, depending on the calculation method used. The cumulative effective dose (CED) ratio per patient for the different size groups varied as follows: from 1.4 to 2.5 (small), from 1.7 to 4.3 (normal), and from 2.2 up to 6.3 (large). The minimum CED across patients varied from 38 up to 200 mSv, while the variation of maximum CED was from 122 up to 538 mSv. Although E is recommended for population estimations, it is sometimes needed and used for individual patients in clinical practice. Its value is highly dependent on the method applied. Individual estimations of E can vary up to 18.1 times and CED estimations can differ up to 6 times. The related large uncertainties should always be taken into account.

Comparison of radiation exposure between endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage and transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for pancreatobiliary diseases

OBJECTIVES

The transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP-D) cannot be performed without fluoroscopy, and there are many situations in which fluoroscopy is required even in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUS-D). Previous studies have compared the efficacy, but not the radiation exposure of EUS-D and ERCP-D. While radiation exposure in ERCP-D has been previously evaluated, there is a paucity of information regarding radiation doses in EUS-D. This study aimed to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-D and ERCP-D between October 2017 and March 2019. The air kerma (AK, mGy), kerma-area product (KAP, Gycm² ), fluoroscopy time (FT, min), and procedure time (PT, min) were assessed. The invasive probability weighting method was used to qualify the comparisons.

RESULTS

We enrolled 372 and 105 patients who underwent ERCP-D and EUS-D, respectively. The mean AK, KAP, and FT in the EUS-D group were higher by 53%, 28%, and 27%, respectively, than those in the ERCP-D group, whereas PT was shorter by approximately 11% (AK, 135.0 vs. 88.4; KAP, 28.1 vs. 21.9; FT, 20.4 vs. 16.0; PT, 38.7 vs. 43.5). The sub-analysis limited to biliary drainage cases showed the same trend (AK, 128.3 vs. 90.9; KAP, 27.0 vs. 22.2; FT, 16.4 vs. 16.1; PT, 32.5 vs. 44.4).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. Radiation exposure was significantly higher in EUS-D than in ERCP-D, despite the shorter procedure time.

How much should we be concerned about cumulative effective doses in medical imaging?

The International Atomic Energy Agency issued a statement calling for action to strengthen the radiation protection of patients undergoing recurrent imaging. This followed reports of patients receiving cumulative effective doses over 100 mSv from multiple computed tomography examinations. In order to evaluate excess risks of cancer incidence among UK patients, data from an exposure management system covering three hospitals within one trust have been studied over 5½ years. Cumulative effective doses for 105 757 patients, from whom 719 (0.68%) received effective dose over 100 mSv, have been analysed using age and sex specific risk factors for stochastic effects. Two cancers might be expected to be initiated in the patients receiving over 100 mSv, while five might be expected to develop cancer among patients receiving 50-100 mSv. However, the calculations ignore health conditions for which the patients are being treated that may shorten their lives, and rely on the linear-no-threshold dose-effect model which is a subject of debate, so they are likely to overestimate cancer incidence. If health of the patients receiving >100 mSv is taken into account, the risk of mortality from cancer initiated by medical exposure might be the order of 1 in 2000. Recommendations on further strengthening of optimisation should be applied to imaging procedures for all patients with special focus on those performed on children and adolescents.

Patient-level dose monitoring in computed tomography: tracking cumulative dose from multiple multi-sequence exams with tube current modulation in children

BACKGROUND

In children exposed to multiple computed tomography (CT) exams, performed with varying z-axis coverage and often with tube current modulation, it is inaccurate to add volume CT dose index (CTDI_vol) and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) to obtain cumulative dose values.

OBJECTIVE

To introduce the patient-size-specific z-axis dose profile and its dose line integral (DLI) as new dose metrics, and to use them to compare cumulative dose calculations against conventional measures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In all children with 2 or more abdominal-pelvic CT scans performed from 2013 through 2019, we retrospectively recorded all series kV, z-axis tube current profile, CTDI_vol, dose-length product (DLP) and calculated SSDE. We constructed dose profiles as a function of z-axis location for each series. One author identified the z-axis location of the superior mesenteric artery origin on each series obtained to align the dose profiles for construction of each patient's cumulative profile. We performed pair-wise comparisons between the peak dose of the cumulative patient dose profile and ΣSSDE, and between ΣDLI and ΣDLP.

RESULTS

We recorded dose data in 143 series obtained in 48 children, ages 0-2 years (n=15) and 8-16 years (n=33): ΣSSDE 12.7±6.7 and peak dose 15.1±8.1 mGy, ΣDLP 278±194 and ΣDLI 550±292 mGy·cm. Peak dose exceeded ΣSSDE by 20.6% (interquartile range [IQR]: 9.9-26.4%, P<0.001), and ΣDLI exceeded ΣDLP by 114% (IQR: 86.5-147.0%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our methodology represents a novel approach for evaluating radiation exposure in recurring pediatric abdominal CT examinations, both at the individual and population levels. Under a wide range of patient variables and acquisition conditions, graphic depiction of the cumulative z-axis dose profile across and beyond scan ranges, including the peak dose of the profile, provides a better tool for cumulative dose documentation than simple summations of SSDE. ΣDLI is advantageous in characterizing overall energy absorption over ΣDLP, which significantly underestimated this in all children.

Potential risks of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease and cancer due to cumulative doses received from diagnostic CT scans?

Potential risks from radiation exposure on the development of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease are indicated by epidemiological studies. Medical exposures give the largest dose to the population from artificial sources, with cumulative doses from multiple CT scans being significant. Data on doses from scans performed on 12 CT scanners in three hospitals over a period of 5½ years, derived using Radimetrics^TMsoftware, have been reviewed for 105 757 patients. Data have been downloaded for heart, brain, thyroid, and effective doses, and cumulative doses analysed using Excel^TMspreadsheets. 2.4% of patients having body CT scans received cumulative doses to the heart over 100 mSv, 9% of whom were under 50 years. 9.6% of patients having head CT scans received cumulative doses to the brain over 100 mSv with 0.08% over 500 mSv from whom 41% were under 50 years, but only 1.3% of patients scanned had thyroid/carotid artery doses over 100 mSv. An approximate evaluation of potential risks from exposures of the heart above 100 mSv and brain over 500 mSv for patients under 60 years would suggest that at most only one patient would demonstrate any excess risk from vascular disease resulting from the exposures. 0.67% of patients scanned received effective doses over 100 mSv, in line with results from European studies, with 8.4% being under 50 years. The application of age and sex specific risk coefficients relating to excess cancer incidence suggests that two or three patients with effective doses over 100 mSv and five patients with effective doses between 50 and 100 mSv, from those examined, might develop cancer as a result of exposure. However, this will be an overestimate, since it does not take patients' health into account. Exposure management software can aid in evaluating cumulative doses and identifying individual patients receiving substantial doses from repetitive imaging.

The radiation doses and radiation protection on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures

Although many interventions involving radiation exposure have been replaced to endoscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary fields, there remains no alternative for enteroscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which requires the use of radiation. In this review, we discuss the radiation doses and protective measures of endoscopic procedures, especially for ERCP. For the patient radiation dose, the average dose area product for diagnostic ERCP was 14-26 Gy.cm², while it increased to as high as 67-89 Gy.cm² for therapeutic ERCP. The corresponding entrance skin doses for diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP were 90 and 250 mGy, respectively. The mean effective doses were 3- 6 mSv for diagnostic ERCP and 12-20 mSv for therapeutic ERCP. For the occupational radiation dose, the typical doses were 94 μGy and 75 μGy for the eye and neck, respectively. However, with an over-couch-type X-ray unit, the eye and neck doses reached as high as 550 and 450 μGy, with maximal doses of up to 2.8 and 2.4 mGy/procedure, respectively.A protective lead shield was effective for an over couch X-ray tube unit. It lowered scattered radiation by up to 89.1% in a phantom study. In actual measurements, the radiation exposure of the endoscopist closest to the unit was reduced to approximately 12%. In conclusion, there is a clear need for raising awareness among medical personnel involved endoscopic procedures to minimise radiation risks to both the patients and staff.

The cumulative radiation dose paradigm in pediatric imaging

Medical imaging professionals have an accountability for both quality and safety in the care of patients that have unexpected or anticipated repeated imaging examinations that use ionizing radiation. One measure in the safety realm for repeated imaging is cumulative effective dose (CED). CED has been increasingly scrutinized in patient populations, including adults and children. Recognizing the challenges with effective dose, including the cumulative nature, effective dose is still the most prevalent exposure currency for recurrent imaging examinations. While the responsibility for dose monitoring incorporates an element of tracking an individual patient cumulative radiation record, a more complex aspect is what should be done with this information. This challenge also differs between the pediatric and adult population, including the fact that high cumulative doses (e.g.,>100 mSv) are reported to occur much less frequently in children than in the adult population. It is worthwhile, then, to review the general construct of CED, including the comparison between the relative percentage occurrence in adult and pediatric populations, the relevant pediatric medical settings in which high CED occurs, the advances in medical care that may affect CED determinations in the future, and offer proposals for the application of the CED paradigm, considering the unique aspects of pediatric care.

Patient Perceptions and Knowledge of Ionizing Radiation From Medical Imaging

IMPORTANCE

Although imaging has become a standard tool of modern medicine, its widespread use has been paralleled by an increasing cumulative radiation dose to patients despite technological advancements and campaigns calling for better awareness and minimization of unnecessary exposures.

OBJECTIVE

To assess patients' knowledge about medical radiation and related risks.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A survey study of hospitals in Italy was conducted; all patients in waiting rooms for medical imaging procedures before undergoing imaging examinations at 16 teaching and nonteaching hospitals were approached to take the survey. The survey was performed from June 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Survey respondents' basic knowledge of ionizing radiation levels and health risks, earlier imaging tests performed, and information and communication about radiation protection issues.

RESULTS

Among 3039 patients invited to participate, the response rate was 94.3% (n = 2866). Participants included 1531 women (53.4%); mean (SD) age was 44.9 (17.3) years. Of the 2866 participants, 1529 (53.3%) were aware of the existence of natural sources of ionizing radiation. Mammography (1101 [38.4%]) and magnetic resonance imaging (1231 [43.0%]) were categorized as radiation-based imaging modalities. More than half of the 2866 patients (1579 [55.1%]; P = .03) did not know that chest computed tomography delivers a larger dose of radiation than chest radiography, and only 1499 (52.3%) knew that radiation can be emitted after nuclear medicine examinations (P = .004). A total of 667 patients (23.3%) believed that radiation risks were unrelated to age, 1273 (44.4%) deemed their knowledge about radiation risks inadequate, and 2305 (80.4%) preferred to be informed about radiation risks by medical staff. A better knowledge of radiation issues was associated with receiving information from health care professionals (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43-2.03; P < .001) and having a higher educational level (intermediate vs low: OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.17-1.88; P < .001; high vs low: OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 2.09-3.43; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this survey suggest that patients undergoing medical imaging procedures have overall limited knowledge about medical radiation. Intervention to achieve better patient awareness of radiation risks related to medical exposures may be beneficial.

Comparative analysis of physical doses and biomarker changes in subjects underwent Computed Tomography, Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography, and interventional procedures

Even though the medical uses of ionizing radiation are well-acknowledged globally as vital tools for the improvement of human health, they also symbolize the major man-made sources of radiation exposure to the population. Estimation of absorbed dose and biological changes after radiation-based imaging might help to better understand the effects of low dose radiation. Because of this, we measured the Entrance Surface Dose (ESD) at different anatomical locations using Lithium tetraborate doped with manganese (Li₂B₄O₇: Mn), recorded Dose Length Product (DLP) and Dose Area Product (DAP), analyzed Chromosomal Aberration (CA), Micronucleus (MN), gamma-H2AX (γ-H2AX), and p53^ser15 proteins in the blood lymphocytes of patients (n = 267) underwent Computed Tomography (CT), Positron Emission Tomography-CT (PET/CT), and interventional procedures and healthy volunteers (n = 19). The DLP and effective doses obtained from PET/CT procedures were significantly higher (p < 0.05) when compared to CT. Fluoroscopic time and DAP were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in therapeutic compared to diagnostic interventional procedures. All the anatomical locations registered a significant amount of ESD, the ESD obtained from CT and interventional procedures were significantly (p < 0.05) higher when compared to PET/CT. Fluoroscopic time did not correlate with the ESD (eye, head, thyroid, and shoulder; R² = 0.03). CA frequency after PET/CT was significantly higher (p < 0.001) when compared to CT and interventional procedures. MN frequency was significantly higher in 24-hs (p < 0.001) post-interventional procedure compared to 2-hs. The mean ± SD of mean fluorescence intensity of γ-H2AX and p53^ser15 obtained from all subjects underwent PET/CT and interventional procedures did not show a significant difference (p > 0.05) between pre- and post-procedure. However, the relative fluorescence intensity of γ-H2AX and p53^ser15 was >1 in 58.5 % and 65.8 % of subjects respectively. Large inter-individual variation and lack of correlation between physical dose and biomarkers suggest the need for robust dosimetry with a large sample size to understand the health effects of low dose radiation.

Referring physician perspective on how to handle frequent use of CT imaging

The increasing use of computed tomography (CT) and other relatively high radiation dose exams in a recurrent manner result in radiation risks to individual patients. Recent studies have provided alarming information not only to the radiological community but also to referring physicians. We, as referring physicians, are often implicated in the overuse of imaging. However, a recent paper rightfully summarized the situation that despite the best use of available clinical decision support system for prescribing an imaging exam at a major hospital in the USA, many patients were found to have high cumulative doses. Motivated by the cue provided by the paper in this very journal, we decided to come forward with a possible solution taking the example of the drug prescription system that we routinely use. We provide a template to translate prescription drug monitoring program to ionising radiation imaging. We suggest that all body CT exams should be monitored at an individual, prescriber, and institution level for frequency of use. Furthermore, there should be radiation risk stratification of an individual patient based on the cumulative radiation burden in recent years. Further, an individual's radiation risk-stratified in different risk levels should be available for use by the referring/ordering clinicians at the point of care. Finally, we feel distanced by the use of multiple scary radiation dose quantities in different imaging modalities and would prefer as simple a metric as 'milligram.'

Assessment of patients' cumulative doses in one year and collective dose to population through CT examinations

PURPOSE

To estimate percentage of patients undergoing multiple CT exams leading to cumulative effective dose (CED) of more than 25, 50, 75 and 100 mSv in one year and assess per capita and the collective effective dose.

METHODS

Data from a regional hospital network was collected retrospectively using radiation dose monitoring system at 6 facilities with 8 CT scanners. The data was analyzed to find number of patients in different dose groups, their age, gender, number of CT exams and exams needed to reach 100 mSv based on age groups.

RESULTS

In one year 43,010 patients underwent 75,252 CT examinations. The number of exams per 1000 population was 153. Further 27% of the patients were younger than 55- years and 15.9% of them were younger than 45-year-old. A total of 0.67% of patients received a CED > 100 mSv; 3.5% had CED > 50 mSv, 11.9% with CED > 25 mSv and the maximum CED was 529 mSv. The minimum time to reach 100 mSv was a single CT exam. Seven patients received > 100 mSv in a single CT exam. 0.36% of patients had 10 or more CT exams in one year and 3.8% had 5 or more CT exams. The mean CED was 12.3 mSv, the average individual effective dose was 1.1 mSv and the collective effective dose was 521.3 person-Sv.

CONCLUSIONS

The alarming high CED received by large number of patients and with high collective dose to population requires urgent actions by all stake holders in the best interest of patient radiation safety.

Radiation concerns in frequent flyer patients: Should imaging history influence decisions about recurrent imaging?

Radiation risks from diagnostic imaging have captured the attention of patients and medical practitioners alike, yet it remains unclear how these considerations can best be incorporated into clinical decision making. This manuscript presents a framework to consider these issues in a potentially at-risk population, the so called "frequent flyer" patients undergoing a large amount of recurrent imaging over time. Radiation risks from the low-dose exposures of diagnostic imaging are briefly reviewed, as applied to recurrent exposures. Some scenarios are then explored in which it may be helpful to incorporate knowledge of a patient's imaging history. There is no simple or uniformly applicable approach to these challenging and often nuanced clinical decisions. The complexity and variability of the underlying disease states and trajectories argues against alerting mechanisms based on a simple cumulative dose threshold. Awareness of imaging history may instead be beneficial in encouraging physicians and patients to take the long view, and to identify those populations of frequent flyers that might benefit from alternative imaging strategies.

Dosimetric quantities and effective dose in medical imaging: a summary for medical doctors

This review presents basic information on the dosimetric quantities used in medical imaging for reporting patient doses and establishing diagnostic reference levels. The proper use of the radiation protection quantity "effective dose" to compare doses delivered by different radiological procedures and different imaging modalities with its uncertainties and limitations, is summarised. The estimates of population doses required by the European Directive on Basic Safety Standards is commented on. Referrers and radiologists should be familiar with the dose quantities to inform patients about radiation risks and benefits. The application of effective dose on the cumulative doses from recurrent imaging procedures is also discussed. Patient summary: Basic information on the measurement units (dosimetric quantities) used in medical imaging for reporting radiation doses should be understandable to patients. The Working Group on "Dosimetry for imaging in clinical practice" recommended that a brief explanation on the used dosimetric quantities and units included in the examination imaging report, should be available for patients. The use of the quantity "effective dose" to compare doses to which patients are exposed to from different radiological procedures and its uncertainties and limitations, should also be explained in plain language. This is also relevant for the dialog on to the cumulative doses from recurrent imaging procedures. The paper summarises these concepts, including the need to estimate the population doses required by the European Directive on Basic Safety Standards. Referrers and radiologists should be familiar with the dose quantities to inform patients about radiation risks and benefits.

Simplified size adjusted dose reference levels for adult CT examinations: A regional study

PURPOSE

To investigate retrospective classification of adult patients into small, average, and large based on effective diameter (EDia) from localizer image of computed tomography (CT) scans and to develop regional diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and achievable doses (AD).

METHOD

The patients falling within the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of EDia were classified as average; those below this range as small and above as large. The CTDI_vol,dose-length-product (DLP) and size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) of all adult patients undergoing CT examinations in 8 CT facilities for 11 months (Dec. 2019 - Oct. 2020) were evaluated. The 75th and 50th percentile values were compared with national and international values.

RESULTS

Of the total of 69,434 CT examinations, nearly 80% fell within average size. The 75th percentile values of CTDI_vol and DLP for small patients for abdomen-pelvic exams were nearly half of average sized patients. Similarly, the 75th percentile values for large patients were nearly double. Similar findings were not found for chest exams. Analysis of image quality and dose factors such as noise, mean axial length, slice thickness, mean number of sequences, use of iterative reconstruction and tube current modulation (TCM) resulted in identification of opportunities for improvement and optimization of different CT facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

DRLs for adult patients were found to vary widely with patient size and thus establishing DRLs only for standard sized patient is not adequate. Simplified and intuitive methods for size classification was shown to provide meaningful information for optimization for patients outside the standard size adult.

Cumulative radiation doses from recurrent PET/CT examinations

Positron emission tomography (PET–CT) is an essential imaging modality for the management of various diseases. Increasing numbers of PET–CT examinations are carried out across the world and deliver benefits to patients; however, there are concerns about the cumulative radiation doses from these examinations in patients. Compared to the radiation exposure delivered by CT, there have been few reports on the frequency of patients with a cumulative effective radiation dose of ≥100 mSv from repeated PET–CT examinations. The emerging dose tracking system facilitates surveys on patient cumulative doses by PET–CT because it can easily wrap up exposure doses of PET radiopharmaceuticals and CT. Regardless of the use of a dose tracking system, implementation of justification for PET–CT examinations and utilisation of dose reduction measures are key issues in coping with the cumulative dose in patients. Despite all the advantages of PET/MRI such as eliminating radiation exposure from CT and providing good tissue contrast in MRI, it is expensive and cannot be introduced at every facility; thus, it is still necessary to utilise PET–CT with radiation reduction measures in most clinical situations.

Radiation protection perspective to recurrent medical imaging: what is known and what more is needed?

This review summarises the current knowledge about recurrent radiological imaging and associated cumulative doses to patients. The recent conservative estimates are for around 0.9 million patients globally who cumulate radiation doses above 100 mSv, where evidence exists for cancer risk elevation. Around one in five is estimated to be under the age of 50. Recurrent imaging is used for managing various health conditions and chronic diseases such as malignancies, trauma, end-stage kidney disease, cardiovascular diseases, Crohn's disease, urolithiasis, cystic pulmonary disease. More studies are needed from different parts of the world to understand the magnitude and appropriateness. The analysis identified areas of future work to improve radiation protection of individuals who are submitted to frequent imaging. These include access to dose saving imaging technologies; improved imaging strategies and appropriateness process; specific optimisation tailored to the clinical condition and patient habitus; wider utilisation of the automatic exposure monitoring systems with an integrated option for individual exposure tracking in standardised patient-specific risk metrics; improved training and communication. The integration of the clinical and exposure history data will support improved knowledge about radiation risks from low doses and individual radiosensitivity. The radiation protection framework will need to respond to the challenge of recurrent imaging and high individual doses. The radiation protection perspective complements the clinical perspective, and the risk to benefit analysis must account holistically for all incidental and long-term benefits and risks for patients, their clinical history and specific needs. This is a step toward the patient-centric health care.

Radiation risk issues in recurrent imaging

Millions of patients benefit from medical imaging every single day. However, we have entered an unprecedented era in imaging practices wherein 1 out of 125 patients can be exposed to effective dose >50 mSv from a single CT exam and 3 out of 10,000 patients undergoing CT exams could potentially receive cumulative effective doses > 100 mSv in a single day. Recurrent imaging with CT, fluoroscopically guided interventions, and hybrid imaging modalities such as positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is more prevalent today than ever before. Presently, we do not know the cumulative doses that patients may be receiving across all imaging modalities combined. Furthermore, patients with diseases with longer life expectancies are being exposed to high doses of radiation enabling radiation effects to manifest over a longer time period. The emphasis in the past on improving justification of imaging and optimization of technique and practice has proved useful. While that must continue, the current situation requires imaging device manufacturers to urgently develop imaging technologies that are safer for patients as high doses have been observed in patients where imaging has been justified through clinical decision-support and optimized by keeping doses below the national benchmark doses. There is a need to have a critical look at the fundamental principles of radiation protection as cumulative doses are likely to increase in the coming years.

Old enemy, new threat: you can't solve today's problems with yesterday's solution

The radiation protection principles of justification, optimization, and dose limitation as enumerated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection have been guiding light for the profession for over three decades. The dose limitation does not apply to medical exposure but keeping patients' doses low is achieved through optimization, particularly by developing and using diagnostic reference levels (DRLs). There are new findings that demonstrate that despite using the best possible approaches to justification and optimization including as well use of DRLs, a very large number of patients are receiving doses in excess of 100 mSv of effective dose or organ doses exceeding 100 mGy. A non-ignorable fraction of patients is receiving such high doses in a single day. The magnitude of such patients creates the need for a relook into the principles with the intent to understand what can be done to attend to today's problems. A look at other areas such as approaches, and principles used in the pharmaceutical industry and in traffic management throws some light into what can be learnt from these examples. It appears that the system needs to be enriched to deal with the protection of the individual patient. The currently available approaches and even the principles are largely based on the protection of the population or group of patients. The third level of justification for individual needs further refinement to take into account series of imaging many patients are needing, and cumulative radiation doses involved, many of which happen in a short duration of 1 to 5 years. There is every likelihood of patient radiation doses continuing to increase further that underscores the need for timely attention. This paper provides several suggestions to deal with the situation.

Cumulative effective dose from recurrent CT examinations in Europe: proposal for clinical guidance based on an ESR EuroSafe Imaging survey

In recent years, the issue of cumulative effective dose received from recurrent computed tomography examinations has become a subject of increasing concern internationally. Evidence, predominantly from the USA, has shown that a significant number of patients receive a cumulative effective dose of 100 mSv or greater. To obtain a European perspective, EuroSafe Imaging carried out a survey to collect European data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent computed tomography examinations. The survey found that a relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose equal to or higher than 100 mSv from computed tomography, most of them having an oncological disease. However, there is considerable variation between institutions as these values ranged from 0 to 2.72%, highlighting that local practice or, depending on the institution and its medical focus, local patient conditions are likely to be a significant factor in the levels of cumulative effective dose received, rather than this simply being a global phenomenon. This paper also provides some practical actions to support the management of cumulative effective dose and to refine or improve practice where recurrent examinations are required. These actions are focused around increasing awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, actions focused on optimisation where a team approach is critical, better use of modern equipment and the use of Dose Management and Clinical Decision Support Systems together with focused clinical audits. The proper use of cumulative effective dose should be part of training programmes for referrers and practitioners, including what information to give to patients. Radiation is used to the benefit of patients in diagnostic procedures such as CT examinations, and in therapeutic procedures like the external radiation treatment for cancer. However, radiation is also known to increase the risk of cancer. To oversee this risk, the cumulative effective dose (CED) received by a patient from imaging procedures over his or her life is important. In this paper, the authors, on behalf of EuroSafe Imaging, report on a survey carried out in Europe that aims to estimate the proportion of patients that undergo CT examinations and are exposed to a CED of more than 100 mSv. At the same time, the survey enquires about and underlines radiologists' measures and radiology departments' strategies to limit such exposure. Over the period of 2015-2018, respondents reported that 0.5% (0-2.72%) of patients were exposed to a CED of ≥ 100 mSv from imaging procedures. The background radiation dose in Europe depends on the location, but it is around 2.5 mSv per year. It is obvious that patients with cancer, chronic diseases and trauma run the highest risk of having a high CED. However, even if the number of patients exposed to ≥ 100 mSv is relatively low, it is important to lower this number even further. Measures could consist in using procedures that do not necessitate radiation, using very low dose procedures, being very critical in requiring imaging procedures and increasing awareness about the issue. KEY POINTS: • A relatively low percentage of patients (0.5%) received a cumulative effective dose from CT computed tomography equal to or greater than 100 mSv, in Europe, most of them having an oncological disease. • There is a wide range in the number of patients who receive cumulative effective dose equal to or greater than 100 mSv (0-2.72%) and optimisation should be improved. • Increasing the awareness of referring physicians through encouraging local dialogue, concrete actions focused on optimisation and development of dose management systems is suggested.

Multicentric study of patients receiving 50 or 100 mSv in a single day through CT imaging-frequency determination and imaging protocols involved

OBJECTIVES

To assess the magnitude and characterization of CT imaging protocols of patients receiving 50 or 100 mSv in a single day.

METHODS

In this multicentric retrospective study covering up to 279 hospitals from January 2015 to December 2019, the effective dose (E) as estimated by dose management system from dose length product of patients was filtered and grouped into per-day dose bands (≤ 20, > 20-50, > 50-70, > 70-100, > 100-200, > 200 mSv). Information on patient's age and imaging protocol was noted. The data were analyzed to determine the frequency of occurrence in each dose band. Top 20 CT imaging protocols that led to patients with a dose of ≥ 50 mSv in a single acquisition were identified and their relative frequency was estimated.

RESULTS

A total of approx. 4.3 million (4,283,738) CT exams were performed in approx. 3.9 million (3,880,524) patient-days indicating 9.41% had more than one CT exam in a single day. There were 31,058 (0.8%) patient-days with ≥ 50 mSv and 1191 (0.03%) with ≥ 100 mSv. Nearly 1/3^rd patient-days reaching ≥ 50 mSv were of patients aged 50 years or younger. The top 20 CT imaging protocols that led to ≥ 50 mSv in a single day belonged to the body region (chest or abdomen and pelvis) and nearly one-third were angiographic studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first study of its kind, we report that patients with 50 mSv+ in a single day or a single exam are not rare. The information on imaging protocols leading to such doses and their frequency has been provided to help develop dose management strategies.

KEY POINTS

• Our study of 4,283,738 CT exams performed in 3,880,524 patient-days indicates 0.8% with 50 mSv+ and 0.03% with 100 mSv+ in a single day. • A total of 9.41% underwent more than one CT exam in a single day; nearly 1/3^rd of those with 50 mSv+ were ≤ 50 years of age. • Identified top 20 CT imaging protocols that led to 50 mSv+ doses in a single exam. All belong to chest or abdomen and pelvis and nearly 1/3^rd were angiographic studies.

Innovative monochromatic x-ray source for high-quality and low-dose medical imaging

PURPOSE

An estimated 377 million diagnostic and interventional radiological exams are performed annually in the United States and approximately 4 to 5 billion globally. All use x-ray tubes that emit x-rays over a broad energy band, a technology that is more than a century old. Only a small fraction of the radiation is useful for imaging while the remaining fraction either increases the radiation dose received by the patient or degrades the image. Monochromatic x-rays can provide lower dose images in many of these radiological applications while maintaining or improving image quality. We report the development of the first monochromatic x-ray source suitable for low-dose, high-quality imaging in the clinic and demonstrate its first application and performance with mammography phantoms.

METHODS

X-ray fluorescence was used to generate monochromatic x-rays with selectable energies from 18 to 60 keV. This patented technology was incorporated into a laboratory prototype of a monochromatic x-ray mammography system. Image quality was evaluated as a function of radiation dose in standard breast phantoms using the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measured for high and low contrast masses and microcalcifications. Spatial imaging properties were assessed from these images as well as from modulation transfer function (MTF) analysis. Measurements using an iodine contrast agent were also performed. The results were compared to those obtained using a commercially available, conventional x-ray mammography system.

RESULTS

Our prototype system reduced radiation dose by factors of five to ten times for the same SNRs as obtained from the conventional system. This performance was demonstrated in phantoms simulating a wide range of lesion sizes and microcalcifications in a variety of breast thicknesses. The high SNRs for very thick breast phantoms provide evidence that screening with less breast compression is possible while maintaining image quality. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) with monochromatic x-rays was shown to provide a simpler and more effective technique at substantially lower radiation dose. The MTF value at 20% was 9 lp/mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The monochromatic x-ray system is more sensitive for imaging a wide range of breast sizes and compositions than conventional broadband mammography. High image quality and lower dose are its hallmarks. It also makes CEDM much more effective than current methods developed for use with conventional broadband mammography systems.

Probability of receiving a high cumulative radiation dose and primary clinical indication of CT examinations: a 5-year observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

High radiation exposure is a concern because of the association with cancer. The objective was to determine the probability of receiving a high radiation dose from CT (from one or more examinations within a 5-year period) and to assess the clinical context by evaluating clinical indications in the high-dose patient group.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study. Effective radiation dose received from one or more CT examinations within a predefined 5-year calendar period was assessed for each patient.

SETTING

Hospital setting.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients undergoing a diagnostic CT examination between July 2013 and July 2018 at the Maastricht University Medical Center.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the probability of receiving a high effective dose, defined as ≥100 mSv, from one or more CT examinations within 5 years as derived from a time-to-event analysis. Secondary outcomes were the clinical indication for the initial scan of patients receiving a high effective dose.

RESULTS

100 672 CT examinations were performed among 49 978 patients including 482 (1%) who received a high radiation dose. The estimated probability of a high effective dose from a single examination is low (0.002% (95% CI 0.00% to 0.01%)). The 4.5-year probability of receiving a high cumulative effective dose was 1.9% (95% CI 1.6% to 2.2%) for women and 1.5% (95% CI 1.3% to 1.7%) for men. The probability was highest in age categories between 51 and 74 years. A total of 2711 (5.5%) of patients underwent more than six CT examinations, and the probability of receiving a high effective dose was 16%. Among patients who received a high effective dose, most indications (80%) were oncology related.

CONCLUSIONS

The probability of receiving a high radiation dose from CT examinations is small but not negligible. In the majority (80%) of high effective dose receiving patients, the indication for the initial CT scan was oncology related.

Radiation risk for patients undergoing cardiac computed tomography examinations

The various technological advancements in computed tomography (CT) have resulted in remarkable growth in the use of CT imaging in clinical practice, not the least of which has been its establishment as the most valuable imaging examination for the assessment of cardiovascular system disorders. The objective of this study was to assess the effective radiation dose and radiation risk for patients during cardiac CT procedures, based on studies from four different hospitals equipped with 128 slice CT equipment. A total of eighty-three patients were investigated in this study with different clinical indications. Effective doses were also calculated using software based on Monte Carlo simulation. The mean patient age (years), weight (kg), and body mass index (BMI (kg/m²)) were 49 ± 11, 82 ± 12, and 31 ± 6, respectively. The results of the study revealed that the tube voltage (kVp) and tube current-exposure time product (mAs) ranged between 100 to 140 and 50 to 840 respectively. The overall average patient dose values for the volume CT dose index [(CTDI_vol), in mGy)] and dose length product (DLP) (in mGy·cm) were 34.8 ± 15 (3.7-117.0) and 383.8 ± 354 (46.0-3277.0) respectively. The average effective dose (mSv) was 15.2 ± 8 (1.2-61.8). The radiation dose values showed wide variation between different hospitals and even within the same hospital. The results indicate the need to optimize radiation dose and to establish diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for patients undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), also to harmonize the imaging protocols to ensure reduced radiation risk.

Analysis of patients receiving ≥ 100 mSv during a computed tomography intervention

OBJECTIVE

To identify a patient cohort who received ≥ 100 mSv during a single computed tomography (CT)-guided intervention and analyze clinical information.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the dose-tracking platform Radimetrics that collects data from all CT scanners in a single hospital, a patient-level search was performed retrospectively by setting a threshold effective dose (E) of 100 mSv for the period from January 2013 to December 2017. Patients who received ≥ 100 mSv in a single day during a single CT-guided intervention were then identified. Procedure types were identified, and medical records were reviewed up to January 2020 to identify patients who developed short- and/or medium-term (up to 8 years) medical consequences.

RESULTS

Of 8952 patients with 100 mSv+, there were 33 patients who underwent 37 CT-guided interventions each resulting in ≥ 100 mSv. Procedures included ablations (15), myelograms (8), drainages (7), biopsies (6), and other (1). The dose for individual procedures was 100.2 to 235.5 mSv with mean and median of 125.7 mSv and 111.8 mSv, respectively. Six patients (18 %) were less than 50 years of age. During the study period of 0.2 to 7 years, there were no deterministic or stochastic consequences identified in this study cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

While infrequent, CT-guided interventions may result in a single procedure dose of ≥ 100 mSv. Awareness of the possibility of such high doses and potential for long-term deleterious effects, especially in younger patients, and consideration of alternative imaging guidance and/or further dose optimization should be strongly considered whenever feasible.

KEY POINTS

• Although not so frequent, CT-guided interventions may result in a single procedure dose of ≥ 100 mSv • Procedures with potential for high dose includes ablations, myelograms, drainages, and biopsies.

Higher patient doses through X-ray imaging procedures

Medical imaging using X-rays has been one of the most popular imaging modalities ever since the discovery of X-rays 125 years ago. With unquestionable benefits, concerns about radiation risks have frequently been raised. Computed tomography (CT) and fluoroscopic guided interventional procedures have the potential to impart higher radiation exposure to patients than radiographic examinations. Despite technological advances, there have been instances of increased doses per procedure mainly because of better diagnostic information in images. However, cumulative dose from multiple procedures is creating new concerns as effective doses >100 mSv are not uncommon. There is a need for action at all levels. Manufacturers must produce equipment that can provide a quality diagnostic image at substantially lesser dose and better implementation of optimization strategies by users. There is an urgent need for the industry to develop CT scanners with sub-mSv radiation dose, a goal that has been lingering. It appears that a new monochromatic X-ray source will lead to replacement of X-ray tubes all over the world in coming years and will lead to a drastic reduction in radiation doses. This innovation will impact all X-ray imaging and will help dose reduction. For interventional procedures, the likely employment of robotic systems in practice may drastically reduce radiation exposures to operators- but patient exposure will still remain an issue. Training needs always need to be emphasized and practiced.

Challenges for managing the cumulative effective dose for patients

Notwithstanding that 100 mSv is not a threshold for radiation effects, cumulative effective dose (CED) for patients of ≥100 mSv derived from recurrent imaging procedures with ionising radiation has been recently the topic of several publications. The International Commission on Radiological Protection has alerted on the problems to use effective dose for risk estimation in individual patients but has accepted to use this quantity for comparison the relative radiation risks between different imaging modalities. A new International Commission on Radiological Protection document on the use of effective dose (including medicine), is in preparation. Recently published data on the number of patients with CED ≥100 mSv ranged from 0.6 to 3.4% in CT and around 4% in interventional radiology. The challenges to manage the existing situation are summarised. The main aspects identified are: 1) New technology with dose reduction techniques. 2) Refinements in the application of the justification and optimisation for these groups of patients. 3) Patient dose management systems with alerts on the cumulative high doses. 4) Education on the proper use of cumulative effective dose for referrers and practitioners including information for patients. 5) Future research programmes in radiation biology and epidemiology may profit the patient dose data from the groups with high cumulative dose values.

Estimates of the number of patients with high cumulative doses through recurrent CT exams in 35 OECD countries

PURPOSE

To estimate the number of patients in OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries who receive a cumulative effective dose (CED) ≥ 100 mSv from recurrent computed tomography (CT) exams.

METHODS

Taking into account recently published data on the number of CTs per patient and the fraction of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv as well as country-specific data for the number of CT exams/1,000 population from OECD publication, this paper makes estimations for 35 OECD countries.

RESULTS

The estimated total number of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv for all 35 OECD countries combined in a 5-year period is around 2.5 million (2,493,685) in a population of 1.2 billion (1,176,641,900), i.e., 0.21% of the population. Expressed per 1,000 population, the range is from 0.51 for Finland to 2.94 for the US, a nearly six-fold difference. Countries with more than 2 patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv in a 5-yr period per 1,000 population are: Belgium, France, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Portugal, Turkey, and US.

CONCLUSIONS

The first estimates of the number of patients likely receiving CED ≥ 100 mSv through recurrent CT exams in 35 OECD countries indicate that 2.5 million patients reach this level in a 5-year period. There is an urgent need for various stakeholders including medical physicists, referring physicians, health policy makers, manufacturers of CT equipment and epidemiologists to attend to the issue in the interest of patient radiation safety.