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

Incidence and Mortality Life-Attributable Risks for Patients Subjected to Recurrent CT Examinations and Cumulative Effective Dose Exceeding 100 mSv

Computed tomography (CT) multi-detector array has been heavily utilized over the past decade. While transforming an individual's diagnosis, the risk of developing pathogenesis as a result remains a concern. The main aim of this institutional cumulative effective dose (CED) review is to highlight the number of adult individuals with a record of CED ≥ 100 mSv over a time span of 5 years. Further, we aim to roughly estimate both incidence and mortality life-attributable risks (LARs) for the shortlisted individuals. CT studies performed over one year, in one dedicated trauma and emergency facility, were retrospectively retrieved and analyzed. Individuals with historical radiological CED ≥ 100 mSv were short-listed. LARs were defined and established based on organ, age and gender. Out of the 4406 CT studies reviewed, 22 individuals were found with CED ≥ 100 mSv. CED varied amongst the short-listed individuals, with the highest CED registered being 223.0 mSv, for a 57-year-old male, cumulated over an average study interval of 46.3 days. The highest median mortality risk was for females, 214 per 100,000 registered for the age group 51-60 years. While certain clinical indications and diseases require close follow-up using radiological examinations, the benefit-to-risk ratio should be carefully considered, particularly when CT is requested.

Cumulative Dose from Recurrent CT Scans: Exploring the DNA Damage Response in Human Non-Transformed Cells

Recurrent computed tomography (CT) examination has become a common diagnostic procedure for several diseases and injuries. Though each singular CT scan exposes individuals at low doses of low linear energy transfer (LET) radiation, the cumulative dose received from recurrent CT scans poses an increasing concern for potential health risks. Here, we evaluated the biological effects of recurrent CT scans on the DNA damage response (DDR) in human fibroblasts and retinal pigment epithelial cells maintained in culture for five months and subjected to four CT scans, one every four weeks. DDR kinetics and eventual accumulation of persistent-radiation-induced foci (P-RIF) were assessed by combined immunofluorescence for γH2AX and 53BP1, i.e., γH2AX/53BP1 foci. We found that CT scan repetitions significantly increased both the number and size of γH2AX/53BP1 foci. In particular, after the third CT scan, we observed the appearance of giant foci that might result from the overlapping of individual small foci and that do not associate with irreversible growth arrest, as shown by DNA replication in the foci-carrying cells. Whether these giant foci represent coalescence of unrepaired DNA damage as reported following single exposition to high doses of high LET radiation is still unclear. However, morphologically, these giant foci resemble the recently described compartmentalization of damaged DNA that should facilitate the repair of DNA double-strand breaks but also increase the risk of chromosomal translocations. Overall, these results indicate that for a correct evaluation of the damage following recurrent CT examinations, it is necessary to consider the size and composition of the foci in addition to their number.

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.

The effect of contact radiation shielding on breast dose during CT abdomen-pelvis: a phantom study

This study aims to investigate if contact shielding reduces breast radiation dose during computed tomography (CT) abdomen-pelvis examinations using automatic tube current modulation to protect one of the four most radiosensitive organs during CT examinations. Dose measurements were taken with and without contact shielding across the anterior and lateral aspects of the breasts and with and without organ dose modulation (ODM) to quantify achievable dose reductions. Although there are no statistically significant findings, when comparing with and without shielding, the mean breast surface dose was reduced by 0.01 μSv without ODM (1.92-1.91 μSv, p = 0.49) and increased by 0.03 μSv with ODM (1.53-1.56 μSv, p = 0.44). Comparing with and without ODM, the mean breast surface dose was reduced by 0.35 μSv with shielding (1.91-1.56 μSv, p = 0.24) and by 0.39 μSv without shielding (1.92-1.53 μSv, p = 0.17). The addition of contact shielding does not provide significant breast surface radiation dose reduction during CT abdomen-pelvis.

Noncancer Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposure on the Eye, the Circulatory System and beyond: Developments made since the 2011 ICRP Statement on Tissue Reactions

For radiation protection purposes, noncancer effects with a threshold-type dose-response relationship have been classified as tissue reactions (formerly called nonstochastic or deterministic effects), and equivalent dose limits aim to prevent occurrence of such tissue reactions. Accumulating evidence demonstrates increased risks for several late occurring noncancer effects at doses and dose rates much lower than previously considered. In 2011, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) issued a statement on tissue reactions to recommend a threshold of 0.5 Gy to the lens of the eye for cataracts and to the heart and brain for diseases of the circulatory system (DCS), independent of dose rate. Literature published thereafter continues to provide updated knowledge. Increased risks for cataracts below 0.5 Gy have been reported in several cohorts (e.g., including in those receiving protracted or chronic exposures). A dose threshold for cataracts is less evident with longer follow-up, with limited evidence available for risk of cataract removal surgery. There is emerging evidence for risk of normal-tension glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy, but the long-held tenet that the lens represents among the most radiosensitive tissues in the eye and in the body seems to remain unchanged. For DCS, increased risks have been reported in various cohorts, but the existence or otherwise of a dose threshold is unclear. The level of risk is less uncertain at lower dose and lower dose rate, with the possibility that risk per unit dose is greater at lower doses and dose rates. Target organs and tissues for DCS are also unknown, but may include heart, large blood vessels and kidneys. Identification of potential factors (e.g., sex, age, lifestyle factors, coexposures, comorbidities, genetics and epigenetics) that may modify radiation risk of cataracts and DCS would be important. Other noncancer effects on the radar include neurological effects (e.g., Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease and dementia) of which elevated risk has increasingly been reported. These late occurring noncancer effects tend to deviate from the definition of tissue reactions, necessitating more scientific developments to reconsider the radiation effect classification system and risk management. This paper gives an overview of historical developments made in ICRP prior to the 2011 statement and an update on relevant developments made since the 2011 ICRP statement.

The effect of breast shielding outside the field of view on breast entrance surface dose in axial X-ray examinations: a phantom study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of outside-field-of-view (FOV) lead shielding on the entrance surface dose (ESD) of the breast on an anthropomorphic X-ray phantom for a variety of axial skeleton X-ray examinations.

METHODS

Using an anthropomorphic phantom and radiation dosimeter, the ESD of the breast was measured with and without outside-FOV shielding in anterior-posterior (AP) abdomen, AP cervical spine, occipitomental 30° (OM30) facial bones, AP lumbar spine, and lateral lumbar spine radiography. The effect of several exposure parameters, including a low milliampere-seconds technique, grid use, automatic exposure control use, wraparound lead (WAL) use, trolley use, and X-ray table use, on the ESD of the breast with and without outside-FOV shielding was investigated. The mean ESD (μSv) and standard deviation for each radiographic protocol were calculated. A one-tailed Student's t-test was carried out to evaluate whether ESD to the breast was reduced with the use of outside-FOV shielding.

RESULTS

A total of 920 breast ESD measurements were recorded across the different protocol parameters. The largest decrease in mean ESD of the breast with outside-FOV shielding was 0.002 μSv (P = 0.084), recorded in the AP abdomen on the table with a grid, OM30 on the table with a grid, OM30 standard protocol on the trolley, and OM30 on the trolley with WAL protocols. This decrease was found to be statistically non-significant.

CONCLUSION

This study found no significant decrease in the ESD of the breast with the use of outside-FOV shielding for the AP abdomen, AP cervical spine, OM30 facial bones, AP lumbar spine, or lateral lumbar spine radiography across a range of protocols.

Pediatric computed tomography doses in Germany from 2016 to 2018 based on large-scale data collection

PURPOSE

Accumulating evidence from epidemiological studies that pediatric computed tomography (CT) examinations can be associated with a small but non-zero excess risk for developing leukemia or brain tumor highlights the need to optimize doses of pediatric CT procedures. Mandatory dose reference levels (DRL) can support reduction of collective dose from CT imaging. Regular surveys of applied dose-related parameters are instrumental to decide when technological advances and optimized protocol design allow lower doses without sacrificing image quality. Our aim was to collect dosimetric data to support adapting current DRL to changing clinical practice.

METHOD

Dosimetric data and technical scan parameters from common pediatric CT examinations were retrospectively collected directly from Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS), Dose Management Systems (DMS), and Radiological Information Systems (RIS).

RESULTS

We collected data from 17 institutions on 7746 CT series from the years 2016 to 2018 from examinations of the head, thorax, abdomen, cervical spine, temporal bone, paranasal sinuses and knee in patients below 18 years of age. Most of the age-stratified parameter distributions were lower than distributions from previously-analyzed data from before 2010. Most of the third quartiles were lower than German DRL at the time of the survey.

CONCLUSIONS

Directly interfacing PACS, DMS, and RIS installations allows large-scale data collection but relies on high data-quality at the documentation stage. Data should be validated by expert knowledge or guided questionnaires. Observed clinical practice in pediatric CT imaging suggests lowering some DRL in Germany is reasonable.

Cumulative Radiation Dose from Medical Imaging in Children with Congenital Heart Disease: A Systematic Review

Children with congenital heart disease are exposed to repeated medical imaging throughout their lifetime. Although the imaging contributes to their care and treatment, exposure to ionising radiation is known to increase one's lifetime attributable risk of malignancy. A systematic search of multiple databases was performed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to all relevant papers and seven were deemed acceptable for quality assessment and risk of bias assessment. The cumulative effective dose (CED) varied widely across the patient cohorts, ranging from 0.96 mSv to 53.5 mSv. However, it was evident across many of the included studies that a significant number of patients were exposed to a CED >20 mSv, the current annual occupational exposure limit. Many factors affected the dose which patients received, including age and clinical demographics. The imaging modality which contributed the most radiation dose to patients was cardiology interventional procedures. Paediatric patients with congenital heart disease are at an increased risk of receiving an elevated cumulative radiation dose across their lifetime. Further research should focus on identifying risk factors for receiving higher radiation doses, keeping track of doses, and dose optimisation where possible.

Effective doses and risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations for male and female patients from childhood to old age

The consideration of risks from medical diagnostic x-ray examinations and their justification commonly relies on estimates of effective dose, although the quantity is actually a health-detriment-weighted summation of organ/tissue-absorbed doses rather than a measure of risk. In its 2007 Recommendations, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) defines effective dose in relation to a nominal value of stochastic detriment following low-level exposure of 5.7 × 10^-2Sv^-1, as an average over both sexes, all ages, and two fixed composite populations (Asian and Euro-American). Effective dose represents the overall (whole-body) dose received by a person from a particular exposure, which can be used for the purposes of radiological protection as set out by ICRP, but it does not provide a measure that is specific to the characteristics of the exposed individual. However, the cancer incidence risk models used by ICRP can be used to provide estimates of risk separately for males and females, as a function of age-at-exposure, and for the two composite populations. Here, these organ/tissue-specific risk models are applied to estimates of organ/tissue-specific absorbed doses from a range of diagnostic procedures to derive lifetime excess cancer incidence risk estimates; the degree of heterogeneity in the distribution of absorbed doses between organs/tissues will depend on the procedure. Depending on the organs/tissues exposed, risks are generally higher in females and notably higher for younger ages-at-exposure. Comparing lifetime cancer incidence risks per Sv effective dose from the different procedures shows that overall risks are higher by about a factor of two to three for the youngest age-at-exposure group, 0-9 yr, than for 30-39 yr adults, and lower by a similar factor for an age-at-exposure of 60-69 yr. Taking into account these differences in risk per Sv, and noting the substantial uncertainties associated with risk estimates, effective dose as currently formulated provides a reasonable basis for assessing the potential risks from medical diagnostic examinations.

Typical effective dose values from diagnostic and interventional radiology

Effective dose (E) in medical procedures is of practical value for comparing doses from different types of procedures which is not possible with the different measurable dose quantities. In this survey we estimated and compared the values of E in 12 medical imaging procedures. The mean E for conventional X-ray in mSv were ranged between 0.01 for skull lateral to 0.5 for abdominal while the mean E for cardiac interventional radiology in mSv was up to 16 for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). For dental radiology the mean E in μSv was 1.2 for intraoral and 10 for panoramic. In mammography the mean E was 0.5 mSv. Compared with the literature, chest postero-anterior (PA), lumbar spine AP, PTCA and mammography procedures had shown larger E values. The obtained results can help in justification of techniques.

A New Algorithm for Automatically Calculating Noise, Spatial Resolution, and Contrast Image Quality Metrics: Proof-of-Concept and Agreement With Subjective Scores in Phantom and Clinical Abdominal CT

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to develop a proof-of-concept computer algorithm to automatically determine noise, spatial resolution, and contrast-related image quality (IQ) metrics in abdominal portal venous phase computed tomography (CT) imaging and to assess agreement between resulting objective IQ metrics and subjective radiologist IQ ratings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An algorithm was developed to calculate noise, spatial resolution, and contrast IQ parameters. The algorithm was subsequently used on 2 datasets of anthropomorphic phantom CT scans, acquired on 2 different scanners (n = 57 each), and on 1 dataset of patient abdominal CT scans (n = 510). These datasets include a range of high to low IQ: in the phantom dataset, this was achieved through varying scanner settings (tube voltage, tube current, reconstruction algorithm); in the patient dataset, lower IQ images were obtained by reconstructing 30 consecutive portal venous phase scans as if they had been acquired at lower mAs. Five noise, 1 spatial, and 13 contrast parameters were computed for the phantom datasets; for the patient dataset, 5 noise, 1 spatial, and 18 contrast parameters were computed. Subjective IQ rating was done using a 5-point Likert scale: 2 radiologists rated a single phantom dataset each, and another 2 radiologists rated the patient dataset in consensus. General agreement between IQ metrics and subjective IQ scores was assessed using Pearson correlation analysis. Likert scores were grouped into 2 categories, "insufficient" (scores 1-2) and "sufficient" (scores 3-5), and differences in computed IQ metrics between these categories were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The algorithm was able to automatically calculate all IQ metrics for 100% of the included scans. Significant correlations with subjective radiologist ratings were found for 4 of 5 noise (R2 range = 0.55-0.70), 1 of 1 spatial resolution (R2 = 0.21 and 0.26), and 10 of 13 contrast (R2 range = 0.11-0.73) parameters in the phantom datasets and for 4 of 5 noise (R2 range = 0.019-0.096), 1 of 1 spatial resolution (R2 = 0.11), and 16 of 18 contrast (R2 range = 0.008-0.116) parameters in the patient dataset. Computed metrics that significantly differed between "insufficient" and "sufficient" categories were 4 of 5 noise, 1 of 1 spatial resolution, 9 and 10 of 13 contrast parameters for phantom the datasets and 3 of 5 noise, 1 of 1 spatial resolution, and 10 of 18 contrast parameters for the patient dataset.

CONCLUSION

The developed algorithm was able to successfully calculate objective noise, spatial resolution, and contrast IQ metrics of both phantom and clinical abdominal CT scans. Furthermore, multiple calculated IQ metrics of all 3 categories were in agreement with subjective radiologist IQ ratings and significantly differed between "insufficient" and "sufficient" IQ scans. These results demonstrate the feasibility and potential of algorithm-determined objective IQ. Such an algorithm should be applicable to any scan and may help in optimization and quality control through automatic IQ assessment in daily clinical practice.

Is Intraoral Scanning Accurate to Evaluate Dental Implant Position? An In-Vitro Study

PURPOSE

The position of dental implants is generally verified through imaging exams, even though its use exposes patients to radiation. Intraoral scanning (IOS) may be a suitable alternative to using radiographic imaging to verify implant position. Using polyurethane jaw models, the purpose of this in-vitro study was to measure and compare implant positions determined by IOS and cone-bean computed tomography (CBCT).

METHODS

One hundred twenty implants were installed in 30 edentulous polyurethane jaws, 4 dental implants in each prototype. Four scanbodies were attached to the implants, and a scanning of each mandible was acquired using an intraoral scanner (CS 3600). All prototypes were also submitted to CBCT. Then, the 3D scan files in STL (Standard Tessellation Language) format were superimposed on the DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) images of the tomographic mandibles. The accuracy of IOS was evaluated by the metric analyses of deviations between the position of the implants projected by the IOS versus the detected tomographically, in which CBCT served as the gold standard, using a free software for digital planning (Bluesky 4 - Grayslake, IL, USA). The following measures were analyzed: radial deviations at the shoulder (Xc) and at the apex of the implants (Xa), height deviation (Xh) and axial deviation. Bland-Altman and a paired t-test were applied to verify the reproducibility between measurements and a t-test for a mean was applied to compare the measurements with zero value.

RESULTS

The results showed Xc and Xa deviation means of 0.14 ± 0.09 mm and 0.12 ± 0.12 mm, respectively. The Xh mean was 0.2 ± 0.12 mm and the axial deviation mean was 0.71° ± 0.66°. T-test showed a statistically significant difference when the 4 means were compared to zero value, represented by the CBCT (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a statistically significant difference IN the scanned measures compared to CBCT as the standard, but the differences may not be clinically significant. The IOS utilization to evaluate the position of dental implants is a radiation-free and reproducible method, with the advantage of not generating metal artifacts. Further clinical studies are needed to validate this new method of postoperative evaluation.

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.

Factors to Consider for the Correct Use of γH2AX in the Evaluation of DNA Double-Strand Breaks Damage Caused by Ionizing Radiation

People exposed to ionizing radiation (IR) both for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes is constantly increasing. Since the use of IR involves a risk of harmful effects, such as the DNA DSB induction, an accurate determination of this induced DNA damage and a correct evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio in the clinical field are of key relevance. γH2AX (the phosphorylated form of the histone variant H2AX) is a very early marker of DSBs that can be induced both in physiological conditions, such as in the absence of specific external agents, and by external factors such as smoking, heat, background environmental radiation, and drugs. All these internal and external conditions result in a basal level of γH2AX which must be considered for the correct assessment of the DSBs after IR exposure. In this review we analyze the most common conditions that induce H2AX phosphorylation, including specific exogenous stimuli, cellular states, basic environmental factors, and lifestyles. Moreover, we discuss the most widely used methods for γH2AX determination and describe the principal applications of γH2AX scoring, paying particular attention to clinical studies. This knowledge will help us optimize the use of available methods in order to discern the specific γH2AX following IR-induced DSBs from the basal level of γH2AX in the cells.

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.

Communication of radiation risk from imaging studies: an IAEA-coordinated international survey

The purpose of this IAEA-coordinated international study was to understand aspects related to the communication of radiation risk from imaging studies, such as how often imaging department personnel and referring physicians are asked about radiation risks in diagnostic imaging, who asks about these risks, how often professionals are able to provide satisfactory answers using qualitative metrics and how often quantitative risk estimates are needed. A web-based questionnaire with ten questions was completed by 386 healthcare professionals from 63 countries from all four continents, including clinicians/referring physicians (42.5%), radiologists or nuclear medicine physicians (26.7%), medical physicists (23.1%), radiographers/radiological technologists (6.2%) and others (1.6%). The results indicate that radiation risk-related questions are largely asked by patients (73.1%) and parents of child patients (38.6%), and 78% of the professionals believe they are able to answer those questions using qualitative metrics such as very small/minimal, small, medium rather than number of cancers likely occurring. The vast majority, with over three times higher frequency, indicated the purpose of knowing previous radiological exams as 'both clinical information and radiation exposure history' rather than 'only clinical information'. Nearly two-thirds of the clinicians/referring physicians indicated that knowing the radiation exposure history of the patient will affect their decision-making for the next exam, as against only about one-fifth who said 'no, it will not affect their decision-making'. The same question, when addressed to radiologists, resulted in a slightly larger fraction of about three-quarters who said 'yes', as opposed to a smaller fraction of about 12% who said 'no, it will not affect their decision-making'. Mapping the present situation of communication of benefits and risks for patients is important and may be the basis of further analysis, regular monitoring and possibly a target for clinical audits. Further studies focused on specific professional groups might help in obtaining á deeper understanding of the need for practical communication tools.

T-shirt size as a classification for body habitus in computed tomography (CT) and development of size-based dose reference levels for different indications

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of patient size on dose indices and develop size-based reference levels (50th and 75th percentiles) for 20 body CT exams for routine and organ-specific clinical indications.

METHODS

Based on effective diameter estimated from adult body CT, each acquisition was classified into T-shirt size as XXS, XS, S, M, L, XL, and XXL. Radiation dose indices for each size and each exam type were correlated.

RESULTS

About 0.93 million CT exams from 256 CT facilities in the United States were analysed. Taking T-shirt size M as a reference, the CTDI_vol for other sizes were: XXS (∼60%), XS (∼65%), S (∼75%), L (∼130%), XL (∼165%), XXL (∼210%), or grossly small patients received about 60% of the dose as compared to M sized patients and XXL required doubling the dose. Taking ratio of the dose indices of the largest to smallest size, it was evident that SSDE variation was much less (about 50%) than that in CTDI_vol, but there was still nearly 40 to 220% variation in SSDE across the range of t-shirt sizes. The 50th and 75th percentile values are presented for CTDI_vol, SSDE and DLP for each of the 20 CT exams and for each of the seven T-shirt sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel approach expressing body habitus in terms of T-shirt size is not only simple and intuitive, but it also provides a tool to have a perception of differences in dose metrices among patients of different body build.

Comparison of Radiation Exposure between Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy with Antegrade Stenting

Fluoroscopy forms an essential part of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting (EUS-HGAS). To date, no study has assessed and compared radiation exposure between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study aimed to compare the radiation exposure parameters between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS from October 2017 to March 2019. The air kerma (AK: mGy), kerma–area product (KAP: Gycm²), fluoroscopy time (FT: min), and procedure time (PT: min) were assessed and compared between the two procedures. Altogether, 45 and 24 patients underwent EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS, respectively. The median AK, KAP, FT, and PT were higher in the EUS-HGAS group than in the EUS-HGS group. A comparison revealed no difference in the technical success rate, complications rate, adverse event occurrence rate, and re-intervention rate between both procedures. This is the first report in which radiation exposure was used as a comparative parameter between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study revealed that radiation exposure is significantly higher in EUS-HGAS than in EUS-HGS. Increased awareness on radiation exposure is warranted among gastroenterologists so that they choose the procedure with lower radiation exposure in cases where both procedures are indicated.

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.

European consensus on patient contact shielding

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.

European consensus on patient contact shielding

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control (AEC) systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.

European consensus on patient contact shielding

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control (AEC) systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.

Dose quantities for measurement and comparison of doses to individual patients in computed tomography (CT)

The dose quantities displayed routinely on CT scanners, the volume averaged CT dose index (CTDI_vol) and dose length product, provide measures of doses calculated for standard phantoms. The American Association of Medical Physics has published conversion factors for the adjustment of CTDI_volto take account of variations in patient size, the results being termed size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). However, CTDI_voland SSDE, while useful in comparing and optimising doses from a set procedure, do not provide risk-related information that takes account of the organs and tissues irradiated and associated cancer risks. A derivative of effective dose that takes account of differences in body and organ sizes and masses, referred to here as size-specific effective dose (SED), can provide such information. Data on organ doses from NCICT software that is based on Monte Carlo simulations of CT scans for 193 adult phantoms have been used to compute values of SED for CT examinations of the trunk and results compared with corresponding values of SSDE. Relationships within ±8% were observed between SED and SSDE for scans extending over similar regions for phantoms with a wide range of sizes. Coefficients have been derived from fits of the data to estimate SED values from SSDEs for different regions of the body for scans of standard lengths based on patient height. A method developed to take account of differences in scan length gave SED results within ±5% of values calculated using the NCI phantom library. This approach could potentially be used to estimate SED from SSDE values, allowing their display at the time a CT scan is performed.

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.

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.

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.

Why is radiological protection different in medicine? Sievert Memorial Lecture

There are many aspects of radiological protection in medicine that are different from other areas of activity using ionising radiation. In this paper, the author presents and justify some of these differences and highlight the reasons for and benefits of this consideration for the medical field. It is important to understand the differences as we are all likely to be patients at some point in our lives and be exposed to ionising radiation for imaging procedures several times and, in some cases, for therapeutic indications. The work done by the International Commission on Radiological Protection and other international organisations to produce and recommend a consistent system of radiological protection in medicine for the safe use of ionising radiation in medical practices must be highlighted. We should understand why we do not apply dose limits and dose constraints to patients, as well as why we have three levels of justification when considering the use of ionising radiation for patients. We highlight the relevance of personalised radiation protection in parallel to personalised medical practice, and the importance of an integrated approach for occupational and patient protection, especially for interventional procedures. We also cover the differences between patients and volunteers in biomedical research, the importance of radiation safety in quality assurance programmes (including the consideration of unintended and accidental exposures) for some clinical practices, and the relevance of education and training in radiological protection for medical and health professionals and information on radiation risks for patients. Finally, the ethical issues with regard to the safe use of ionising radiation in medicine and the impact of new technology will be addressed.

Cumulative radiation doses due to nuclear medicine examinations: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the published data regarding the cumulative exposure to radiation in selected cohorts of adults or paediatric patients due to diagnostic nuclear medicine examinations.

METHODS

We conducted PubMed/Medline searches of peer-reviewed papers on cumulated effective dose (CED) from diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures published between 01 January 2010 until 31 January 2021. Studies were considered eligible if the contribution of nuclear medicine examinations to total CED was >10%. Studies reporting cumulative doses in a single episode of care or in a limited time (≤1 year) were excluded. The main outcomes for which data were sought were the CED accrued by patients, the period in which the CED was accrued, the percentage of patients with CED > 100 mSv and the percentage contribution due to nuclear medicine procedures to the overall CED.

RESULTS

The studies included in the synthesis were 18 which enrolled a total of 1,76,371 patients. Eleven (1,757 patients), three (1,74,079 patients) and four (535 patients) were related to oncological, cardiologic and transplanted patients, respectively. All the studies were retrospective; some of the source materials referred to small number of patients and some of the patients were followed for a short time. Not many studies accurately quantified the contribution of nuclear medicine procedures to the overall radiation exposure due to medical imaging. Finally, most of the studies covered an observation period which extended mainly in the 2000-2010 decade.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need of prospective, multicentric studies enrolling a greater number of patients, followed for longer period in selected groups of patients to fully capture the cumulative exposure to radiation in these settings.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This systematic review allows to identify selected group of patients with a specific health status in which the cumulated exposure to radiation may be of concern and where the contribution of nuclear medicine procedures to the total CED is significant.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Evaluation of the lifetime brain/central nervous system cancer risk associated with childhood head CT scanning in Japan

The use of computed tomography (CT) scanning has increased worldwide over the decades, and Japan is one of the leading countries in annual frequency of diagnostic CT. Although benefits of CT scan are undisputable, concerns have been raised about potential health effects of ionizing radiation exposure from CT, particularly among children who are likely more susceptible to radiation than adults. Our study aims to evaluate the cumulated lifetime risk of the brain/central nervous system (CNS) cancer due to head CT examinations performed on Japanese children at age 0 to 10 years in 2012, 2015 and 2018. The frequency and dose distribution of head CT examinations were estimated based on information from recent national statistics and nationwide surveys. The lifetime risk attributable to exposure was calculated by applying risk models based on the study of Japanese atomic-bomb survivors. In contrast to the overall increasing trend, the frequency of childhood CT, especially at age < 5, was decreasing, reflecting a growing awareness for efforts to reduce childhood CT exposure over the past decade. In 2018, 138 532 head CT examinations were performed at age 0 to 10, which would consequently induce a lifetime excess of 22 cases (1 per 6300 scans) of brain/CNS cancers, accounting for 5% of the total cases. More excess cases were estimated among men than among women, and excess cases could emerge at relatively young ages. These results would have useful implications as scientific basis for future large-scale epidemiological studies and also as quantitative evidence to justify the benefits of CT vs risks in Japan.

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.

Cognitive effects of low dose of ionizing radiation - Lessons learned and research gaps from epidemiological and biological studies

The last decades have seen increased concern about the possible effects of low to moderate doses of ionizing radiation (IR) exposure on cognitive function. An interdisciplinary group of experts (biologists, epidemiologists, dosimetrists and clinicians) in this field gathered together in the framework of the European MELODI workshop on non-cancer effects of IR to summarise the state of knowledge on the topic and elaborate research recommendations for future studies in this area. Overall, there is evidence of cognitive effects from low IR doses both from biology and epidemiology, though a better characterization of effects and understanding of mechanisms is needed. There is a need to better describe the specific cognitive function or diseases that may be affected by radiation exposure. Such cognitive deficit characterization should consider the human life span, as effects might differ with age at exposure and at outcome assessment. Measurements of biomarkers, including imaging, will likely help our understanding on the mechanism of cognitive-related radiation induced deficit. The identification of loci of individual genetic susceptibility and the study of gene expression may help identify individuals at higher risk. The mechanisms behind the radiation induced cognitive effects are not clear and are likely to involve several biological pathways and different cell types. Well conducted research in large epidemiological cohorts and experimental studies in appropriate animal models are needed to improve the understanding of radiation-induced cognitive effects. Results may then be translated into recommendations for clinical radiation oncology and imaging decision making processes.

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.

Patients undergoing multiphase CT scans and receiving a cumulative effective dose of ≥ 100 mSv in a single episode of care

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the number of patients who receive a cumulative effective dose (CED) of ≥ 100 mSv from computed tomography (CT) in a single day or episode of care.

METHODS

We examined 28,870 patients who underwent 49,834 CT examinations in a tertiary care centre in Italy in 2.5 years. Radiation exposures were retrieved from the hospital's automatic exposure monitoring system. Two cohorts were identified as those who received a CED of ≥ 100 mSv in a single day and within a month starting from the first examination. Organ doses were estimated for the first cohort.

RESULTS

Among the 1765 (6.1%) patients who received CED ≥ 100 mSv in the observation period, 427 received a CED of ≥ 100 mSv within a month (and 70 patients in a single day). This group represented 1.5% of all patients who underwent CT exams and 24% of those who received CED ≥ 100 mSv in the observation period. The clinical indication for referral included cancer in 132 patients (31%) and non-oncological indications in 295 patients (69%). In 68/70 patients with CED > 100 mSv in a single day, at least one organ/tissue received a dose of ≥ 100 mGy.

CONCLUSIONS

The finding of a sizeable percentage of patients undergoing CT exams and receiving CED ≥ 100 mSv in a single episode of care points toward the need of imaging appropriateness criteria, to revise the routine protocols, to replace older machines, and to provide to the radiologist the patient's prior radiation history to facilitate an appropriate decision-making process.

KEY POINTS

• Patients can receive effective doses greater than 100 mSv in a single CT or in multiple CT examinations performed in a single episode of care in 1.5% of patients in a 2.5-year period. • In this study, the clinical indication for CT referral was non-oncological in 69% of patients. • The patient's prior radiation history should be provided to the referring physicians and the radiological medical practitioner to facilitate an appropriate decision-making process.

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.

Optimization of paranasal sinus CT procedure: Ultra-low dose CT as a roadmap for pre-functional endoscopic sinus surgery

OBJECTIVE

To assess image quality and radiation dose associated with ultra-low dose CT protocol for patients with benign paranasal sinus diseases undergoing functional endoscopic surgery (FESS).

METHODS

We scanned the head portion of Alderson RANDO phantom on a second generation, dual-source, multidetector-row CT scanner (Siemens Definition Flash) using standard-dose and five low-dose protocols. Two radiologists assessed the image quality for each protocol to determine best ultra-low-dose protocols for imaging patients with benign paranasal sinus diseases undergoing FESS. The ultra-low-dose CT protocols were then used for scanning. Thereafter, 40 adult patients (age range 18-54 years, M:F 23:17) were scanned with the four low dose scanning protocols (10 patients per protocol). On both transverse and coronal reformatted CT images, two radiologists assessed visibility of key anatomic landmarks for FESS on a 2-point scale (1 = clear and complete visualization; 2 = suboptimal visualization). Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Cohen's kappa coefficient for interobserver agreement.

RESULTS

In phantom study, the lowest dose scan protocol (CTDI_vol 2.1 mGy, 70 kV, 75 mAs) was unacceptable due to poor image quality. For patient studies, both radiologists gave acceptable image quality scores for ultra-low-dose scan protocol with axial scan mode, automatic tube potential selection and tube current modulation (CTDI_vol 2.2 mGy; DLP 22.9 mGy.cm) with up to 60% lower dose compared to prior standard-dose CT (CTDI_vol 5.3 mGy; DLP 73.5 mGy.cm).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultra-low-dose CT protocol provides sufficient image quality for scanning patients undergoing functional endoscopic surgery for benign paranasal sinus diseases.

Exposure of patients to low doses of X-radiation during neuro-interventional imaging and procedures: Dose estimation and analysis of γ-H2AX foci and gene expression in blood lymphocytes

Radiation has widespread applications in medicine. However, despite the benefits of medical radiation exposures, adverse long-term health effects are cause for concern. Protein and gene biomarkers are early indicators of cellular response after low-dose exposure. We examined DNA damage by quantifying γ-H2AX foci and expression of twelve candidate genes in the blood lymphocytes of patients exposed to low doses of X-radiation during neuro-interventional procedures. Entrance surface dose (ESD; 10.92-1062.55 mGy) was measured by thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD). Absorbed dose was estimated using γ-H2AX focus frequency and gene expression, with in vitro dose-response curves generated for the same biomarkers. γ-H2AX foci in post-exposure samples were significantly higher than in pre-exposure samples. Among the genes analysed, FDXR, ATM, BCL2, MDM2, TNFSF9, and PCNA showed increased expression; CDKN1A, DDB2, SESN1, BAX, and TNFRSF10B showed unchanged or decreased expression. Absorbed dose, estimated based on γ-H2AX focus frequency and gene expression changes, did not show any correlation with measured ESD. Patients undergoing interventional procedures receive considerable radiation doses, resulting in DNA damage and altered gene expression. Medical procedures should be carried out using the lowest radiation doses possible without compromising treatment.