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.

Medical imaging dose optimisation from ground up: expert opinion of an international summit

As in any medical intervention, there is either a known or an anticipated benefit to the patient from undergoing a medical imaging procedure. This benefit is generally significant, as demonstrated by the manner in which medical imaging has transformed clinical medicine. At the same time, when it comes to imaging that deploys ionising radiation, there is a potential associated risk from radiation. Radiation risk has been recognised as a key liability in the practice of medical imaging, creating a motivation for radiation dose optimisation. The level of radiation dose and risk in imaging varies but is generally low. Thus, from the epidemiological perspective, this makes the estimation of the precise level of associated risk highly uncertain. However, in spite of the low magnitude and high uncertainty of this risk, its possibility cannot easily be refuted. Therefore, given the moral obligation of healthcare providers, 'first, do no harm,' there is an ethical obligation to mitigate this risk. Precisely how to achieve this goal scientifically and practically within a coherent system has been an open question. To address this need, in 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organised a summit to clarify the role of Diagnostic Reference Levels to optimise imaging dose, summarised into an initial report (Järvinen et al 2017 Journal of Medical Imaging 4 031214). Through a consensus building exercise, the summit further concluded that the imaging optimisation goal goes beyond dose alone, and should include image quality as a means to include both the benefit and the safety of the exam. The present, second report details the deliberation of the summit on imaging optimisation.

The International Atomic Energy Agency action plan on radiation protection of patients and staff in interventional procedures: Achieving change in practice

INTRODUCTION

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organized the 3rd international conference on radiation protection (RP) of patients in December 2017. This paper presents the conclusions on the interventional procedures (IP) session.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The IAEA conference was conducted as a series of plenary sessions followed by various thematic sessions. "Radiation protection of patients and staff in interventional procedures" session keynote speakers presented information on: 1) Risk management of skin injuries, 2) Occupational radiation risks and 3) RP for paediatric patients. Then, a summary of the session-related papers was presented by a rapporteur, followed by an open question-and-answer discussion.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of papers came from Europe. Forty-four percent (44%) were patient studies, 44% were occupational and 12% were combined studies. Occupational studies were mostly on eye lens dosimetry. The rest were on scattered radiation measurements and dose tracking. The majority of patient studies related to patient exposure with only one study on paediatric patients. Automatic patient dose reporting is considered as a first step for dose optimization. Despite efforts, paediatric IP radiation dose data are still scarce. The keynote speakers outlined recent achievements but also challenges in the field. Forecasting technology, task-specific targeted education from educators familiar with the clinical situation, more accurate estimation of lens doses and improved identification of high-risk professional groups are some of the areas they focused on.

CONCLUSIONS

Manufacturers play an important role in making patients safer. Low dose technologies are still expensive and manufacturers should make these affordable in less resourced countries. Automatic patient dose reporting and real-time skin dose map are important for dose optimization. Clinical audit and better QA processes together with more studies on the impact of lens opacities in clinical practice and on paediatric patients are needed.

Patient dose monitoring and the use of diagnostic reference levels for the optimization of protection in medical imaging: current status and challenges worldwide

Optimization is one of the key concepts of radiation protection in medical imaging. In practice, it involves compromising between the image quality and dose to the patient; the dose should not be higher than necessary to achieve an image quality (or diagnostic information) needed for the clinical task. Monitoring patient dose is a key requirement toward optimization. The concept of diagnostic reference level (DRL) was introduced by the International Commission on Radiological Protection as a practical tool for optimization. Unfortunately, this concept has not been applied consistently worldwide. To review the current strengths and weaknesses worldwide and to promote improvements, the International Atomic Energy Agency organized a Technical Meeting on patient dose monitoring and the use of DRLs on May 2016. This paper reports a summary of the findings and conclusions from the meeting. The strengths and weaknesses were generally different in less-developed countries compared with developed countries. Possible improvements were suggested in six areas: human resources and responsibilities, training, safety and quality culture, regulations, funding, and tools and methods. An overall conclusion was that radiation protection requires a patient-centric approach and a transfer from purely reactive to increasingly proactive optimization, whereby the best outcome is expected from good teamwork.

A study to establish international diagnostic reference levels for paediatric computed tomography

The article reports results from the largest international dose survey in paediatric computed tomography (CT) in 32 countries and proposes international diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in terms of computed tomography dose index (CTDI vol) and dose length product (DLP). It also assesses whether mean or median values of individual facilities should be used. A total of 6115 individual patient data were recorded among four age groups: <1 y, >1-5 y, >5-10 y and >10-15 y. CTDIw, CTDI vol and DLP from the CT console were recorded in dedicated forms together with patient data and technical parameters. Statistical analysis was performed, and international DRLs were established at rounded 75th percentile values of distribution of median values from all CT facilities. The study presents evidence in favour of using median rather than mean of patient dose indices as the representative of typical local dose in a facility, and for establishing DRLs as third quartile of median values. International DRLs were established for paediatric CT examinations for routine head, chest and abdomen in the four age groups. DRLs for CTDI vol are similar to the reference values from other published reports, with some differences for chest and abdomen CT. Higher variations were observed between DLP values, based on a survey of whole multi-phase exams. It may be noted that other studies in literature were based on single phase only. DRLs reported in this article can be used in countries without sufficient medical physics support to identify non-optimised practice. Recommendations to improve the accuracy and importance of future surveys are provided.

Patient grouping for dose surveys and establishment of diagnostic reference levels in paediatric computed tomography

There has been confusion in literature on whether paediatric patients should be grouped according to age, weight or other parameters when dealing with dose surveys. The present work aims to suggest a pragmatic approach to achieve reasonable accuracy for performing patient dose surveys in countries with limited resources. The analysis is based on a subset of data collected within the IAEA survey of paediatric computed tomography (CT) doses, involving 82 CT facilities from 32 countries in Asia, Europe, Africa and Latin America. Data for 6115 patients were collected, in 34.5 % of which data for weight were available. The present study suggests that using four age groups, <1, >1-5, >5-10 and >10-15 y, is realistic and pragmatic for dose surveys in less resourced countries and for the establishment of DRLs. To ensure relevant accuracy of results, data for >30 patients in a particular age group should be collected if patient weight is not known. If a smaller sample is used, patient weight should be recorded and the median weight in the sample should be within 5-10 % from the median weight of the sample for which the DRLs were established. Comparison of results from different surveys should always be performed with caution, taking into consideration the way of grouping of paediatric patients. Dose results can be corrected for differences in patient weight/age group.

Impact of the X-ray system setting on patient dose and image quality; a case study with two interventional cardiology systems

This study investigates the influence of the initial X-ray system setting on patient doses and image quality in interventional cardiology procedures. Two dedicated interventional cardiology systems were studied: a system with image intensifier (II) and a flat detector (FD) system. Entrance surface air kerma (ESAK) rates in fluoroscopy and ESAK per frame in the acquisition mode were measured on the surface of a PMMA phantom for the field of views (FOV) of 23 and 17 cm (II system) and 25 and 20 cm (FD system). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were estimated using DICOM images obtained during the measurements. System performances were compared using a figure of merit combining SNR and ESAK. The influence of system setting on patient doses was investigated analysing the information for air kerma area product (KAP) and cumulative dose (CD) at the patient entrance reference point, for a sample of coronary angiography examinations. ESAK rates in fluoroscopy modes were a factor of 2 higher in the FD system for the similar FOVs, resulting in a factor of 1.9 higher median values of KAP and CD for patients with FD system than for the II system. SNR and CNR for the FD system were better than the equivalent FOVs with II. The resulting FOM was better for the FD system in both FOVs. Potential for optimisation was suggested by adjusting system settings.

ICRP publication 121: radiological protection in paediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology

Paediatric patients have a higher average risk of developing cancer compared with adults receiving the same dose. The longer life expectancy in children allows more time for any harmful effects of radiation to manifest, and developing organs and tissues are more sensitive to the effects of radiation. This publication aims to provide guiding principles of radiological protection for referring clinicians and clinical staff performing diagnostic imaging and interventional procedures for paediatric patients. It begins with a brief description of the basic concepts of radiological protection, followed by the general aspects of radiological protection, including principles of justification and optimisation. Guidelines and suggestions for radiological protection in specific modalities - radiography and fluoroscopy, interventional radiology, and computed tomography - are subsequently covered in depth. The report concludes with a summary and recommendations. The importance of rigorous justification of radiological procedures is emphasised for every procedure involving ionising radiation, and the use of imaging modalities that are non-ionising should always be considered. The basic aim of optimisation of radiological protection is to adjust imaging parameters and institute protective measures such that the required image is obtained with the lowest possible dose of radiation, and that net benefit is maximised to maintain sufficient quality for diagnostic interpretation. Special consideration should be given to the availability of dose reduction measures when purchasing new imaging equipment for paediatric use. One of the unique aspects of paediatric imaging is with regards to the wide range in patient size (and weight), therefore requiring special attention to optimisation and modification of equipment, technique, and imaging parameters. Examples of good radiographic and fluoroscopic technique include attention to patient positioning, field size and adequate collimation, use of protective shielding, optimisation of exposure factors, use of pulsed fluoroscopy, limiting fluoroscopy time, etc. Major paediatric interventional procedures should be performed by experienced paediatric interventional operators, and a second, specific level of training in radiological protection is desirable (in some countries, this is mandatory). For computed tomography, dose reduction should be optimised by the adjustment of scan parameters (such as mA, kVp, and pitch) according to patient weight or age, region scanned, and study indication (e.g. images with greater noise should be accepted if they are of sufficient diagnostic quality). Other strategies include restricting multiphase examination protocols, avoiding overlapping of scan regions, and only scanning the area in question. Up-to-date dose reduction technology such as tube current modulation, organ-based dose modulation, auto kV technology, and iterative reconstruction should be utilised when appropriate. It is anticipated that this publication will assist institutions in encouraging the standardisation of procedures, and that it may help increase awareness and ultimately improve practices for the benefit of patients.

Eye lens dosimetry in interventional cardiology: results of staff dose measurements and link to patient dose levels

Workers involved in interventional cardiology procedures receive high eye lens dose if protection is not used. Currently, there is no suitable method for routine use for the measurement of eye dose. Since most angiography machines are equipped with suitable patient dosemeters, deriving factors linking staff eye doses to the patient doses can be helpful. In this study the patient kerma-area product, cumulative dose at an interventional reference point and eye dose in terms of Hp(3) of the cardiologists, nurses and radiographers for interventional cardiology procedures have been measured. Correlations between the patient dose and the staff eye dose were obtained. The mean eye dose was 121 µSv for the first operator, 33 µSv for the second operator/nurse and 12 µSv for radiographer. Normalised eye lens doses per unit kerma-area product were 0.94 µSv Gy⁻¹ cm⁻² for the first operator, 0.33 µSv Gy⁻¹ cm⁻² for the second operator/nurse and 0.16 µSv Gy⁻¹ cm⁻² for radiographers. Statistical analysis indicated that there is a weak but significant (p < 0.01) correlation between the eye dose and the kerma-area product for all three staff categories. These values are based on a local practice and may provide useful reference for other studies for validation and for wider utilisation in assessing the eye dose using patient dose values.

Radiation-induced eye lens changes and risk for cataract in interventional cardiology

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have reported a significant increase in eye lens opacities among staff in the cardiac catheterization laboratory but indicated further studies are needed to confirm the findings.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of opacities in eyes of cardiologists, radiographers and nurses working in interventional cardiology.

METHODS

The eyes of 52 staff in interventional cardiology facilities and 34 age- and sex-matched unexposed controls were screened in a cardiology conference held in Kuala Lumpur by dilated slit-lamp examination, and posterior lens changes were graded. Individual cumulative lens X-ray exposures were calculated from responses to a questionnaire in terms of workload and working practice.

RESULTS

The prevalence of posterior lens opacities among interventional cardiologists was 53%, while in nurses and radiographers it was 45%. Corresponding relative risks were 2.6 (95% CI: 1.2-5.4) and 2.2 (95% CI: 0.98-4.9), for interventional cardiologists and support staff, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms a statistically significant increase in radiation-associated posterior lens changes in the eyes of interventional cardiology staff.

Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation

OBJECTIVES

The Radiation Protection of Patients Unit of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is concerned about the effectiveness of justification of diagnostic medical exposures. Recent published work and the report of an initial IAEA consultation in the area gave grounds for such concerns. There is a significant level of inappropriate usage, and, in some cases, a poor level of awareness of dose and risk among some key groups involved. This article aims to address this.

METHODS

The IAEA convened a second group of experts in November 2008 to review practical and achievable actions that might lead to more effective justification.

RESULTS

This report summarises the matters that this group considered and the outcome of their deliberations. There is a need for improved communication, both within professions and between professionals on one hand, and between professionals and the patients/public on the other. Coupled with this, the issue of consent to imaging procedures was revisited. The need for good evidence-based referral guidelines or criteria of acceptability was emphasised, as was the need for their global adaptation and dissemination.

CONCLUSION

Clinical audit was regarded as a key tool in ensuring that justification becomes an effective, transparent and accountable part of normal radiological practice. In summary, justification would be facilitated by the "3 As": awareness, appropriateness and audit.

Status of radiation protection in interventional cardiology in four East European countries

Level of staff and patient radiation protection in interventional cardiology in four counties (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia) as a part of International Atomic Energy Agency project (RER/9/093) are presented. Patient doses were assessed in terms of air kerma area product (KAP), peak skin dose (PSD) or air kerma at interventional reference point (K(IRP)). Results were available from nine hospitals: 775 patients for KAP, 157 for PSD and 437 for K(IRP). Eight centres reported KAP >100 Gy cm(2) and five centres reported values >200 Gy cm(2). From patients monitored in terms of PSD, 14 (9 %) had PSD >2 Gy and 6 (3 %) patients from those monitored in terms of K(IRP) had value >5 Gy, indicating risk of skin injury. The results indicate need for optimisation and dose monitoring in complex fluoroscopically guided cardiology interventions.

International project on individual monitoring and radiation exposure levels in interventional cardiology

Within the Information System on Occupational Exposure in Medicine, Industry and Research (ISEMIR), a new International Atomic Energy Agency initiative, a Working Group on interventional cardiology, aims to assess staff radiation protection (RP) levels and to propose an international database of occupational exposures. A survey of regulatory bodies (RBs) has provided information at the country level on RP practice in interventional cardiology (IC). Concerning requirements for wearing personal dosemeters, only 57 % of the RB specifies the number and position of dosemeters for staff monitoring. Less than 40 % of the RBs could provide occupational doses. Reported annual median effective dose values (often <0.5 mSv) were lower than expected considering validated data from facility-specific studies, indicating that compliance with continuous individual monitoring is often not achieved in IC. A true assessment of annual personnel doses in IC will never be realised unless a knowledge of monitoring compliance is incorporated into the analysis.

Current issues and actions in radiation protection of patients

Medical application of ionizing radiation is a massive and increasing activity globally. While the use of ionizing radiation in medicine brings tremendous benefits to the global population, the associated risks due to stochastic and deterministic effects make it necessary to protect patients from potential harm. Current issues in radiation protection of patients include not only the rapidly increasing collective dose to the global population from medical exposure, but also that a substantial percentage of diagnostic imaging examinations are unnecessary, and the cumulative dose to individuals from medical exposure is growing. In addition to this, continued reports on deterministic injuries from safety related events in the medical use of ionizing radiation are raising awareness on the necessity for accident prevention measures. The International Atomic Energy Agency is engaged in several activities to reverse the negative trends of these current issues, including improvement of the justification process, the tracking of radiation history of individual patients, shared learning of safety significant events, and the use of comprehensive quality audits in the clinical environment.

Radiation safety in abdominal computed tomography

The rapid technological developments in computed tomography (CT) have enabled many new clinical applications in the abdominal region. Abdomen CT is considered as a high radiation dose examination due to the large number of radiosensitive organs in the field of view. CT radiation dose has received a lot of attention not only by the medical specialties and researchers, but also by patients and media. This article reviews the situation on radiation dose and risk and provides practical guidelines to effectively manage the radiation dose without losing the benefits and maintaining diagnostic confidence in CT procedures.

Detection of Metabolites by Proton Ex Vivo NMR, in Vivo MR Spectroscopy Peaks and Tissue Content Analysis: Biochemical-Magnetic Resonance Correlation: Preliminary Results

*Aim*: Metabolite concentrations by in vivo magnetic resonance spectroscopy and ex vivo NMR spectroscopy were compared with excised normal human tissue relaxation times and tissue homogenate contents.*Hypothesis*: Biochemical analysis combined with NMR and MR spectroscopy defines better tissue analysis.

Materials and Methods:

Metabolites were measured using peak area, amplitude and molecular weights of metabolites in the reference solutions. In normal brain and heart autopsy, muscle and liver biopsy tissue ex vivo NMR peaks and spin-lattice (T1) and spin-spin (T2) relaxation times, were compared with diseased tissue NMR data in meningioma brain, myocardial infarct heart, duchene-muscular-dystrophy muscle and diffused-liver-injury liver after respective in vivo proton MR spectroscopy was done. NMR data was compared with tissue homogenate contents and serum levels of biochemical parameters.*Results*: The quantitation of smaller NMR visible metabolites was feasible for both ex vivo NMR and in vivo MR spectroscopy. Ex vivo H-1 NMR and in vivo MRS metabolite characteristic peaks (disease/normal data represented as fold change), T1 and T2, and metabolites in tissue homogenate and serum indicated muscle fibrosis in DMD, cardiac energy depletion in MI heart, neuronal dysfunction in meningioma brain and carbohydrate-lipid metabolic crisis in DLI liver tissues.*Conclusion*: This preliminary report highlights the biochemical-magnetic resonance correlation as basis of magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging data interpretation of disease.

Dose reduction in CT while maintaining diagnostic confidence: diagnostic reference levels at routine head, chest, and abdominal CT--IAEA-coordinated research project

PURPOSE

To measure radiation doses for computed tomography (CT) of the head, chest, and abdomen and compare them with the diagnostic reference levels, as part of the International Atomic Energy Agency Research coordination project.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The local ethics committees of all participating institutions approved the study protocol. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. All scanners were helical single-section or multi-detector row CT systems. Six hundred thirty-three patients undergoing head (n = 97), chest (n = 243), or abdominal (n = 293) CT were included. Collected data included patient height, weight, sex, and age; tube voltage and tube current-time product settings; pitch; section thickness; number of sections; weighted or volumetric CT dose index; and dose-length product (DLP). The effective dose was also estimated and served as collective dose estimation data.

RESULTS

Mean volumetric CT dose index and DLP values were below the European diagnostic reference levels: 39 mGy and 544 mGy . cm, respectively, at head CT; 9.3 mGy and 348 mGy . cm, respectively, at chest CT; and 10.4 mGy and 549 mGy . cm, respectively, at abdominal CT. Estimated effective doses were 1.2, 5.9, and 8.2 mSv, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Comparison of CT results with diagnostic reference levels revealed the need for revisions, partly because the newer scanners have improved technology that facilitates lower patient doses.