Vanessa Döwich, Felipe Soares Torres, Andressa Lima Nietto, Vitor Silva Timm, Maurício Anés, Alexandre Bacelar, Paulo José Cauduro Maróstica
{"title":"Radiation dose assessment of pediatric computed tomography of the chest: the need to consider patient size.","authors":"Vanessa Döwich, Felipe Soares Torres, Andressa Lima Nietto, Vitor Silva Timm, Maurício Anés, Alexandre Bacelar, Paulo José Cauduro Maróstica","doi":"10.1093/rpd/ncae212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the radiation dose of chest computed tomography (CT) examinations of pediatric patients and the extent to which volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) underestimates radiation dose in comparison to size specific dose estimates (SSDE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single-center, retrospective study of consecutive unenhanced pediatric (age <18 years) chest CTs between October 2015 and October 2016. Radiation dose as well as demographic and clinical data were recorded from 133 chest CTs. Patients were grouped into 4 categories based on mean effective diameter of the chest. SSDE was generated for each patient according to the water equivalent and effective diameter and compared to CTDIvol. Factors associated with higher radiation doses were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CTDIvol underestimated radiation dose by 54.7%, 47.6%, 40.2%, and 31.2% (P < .001) for effective diameter groups 1 to 4, respectively, when compared to SSDE (calculated according to the water equivalent). When calculated according to the effective diameter, CTDIvol underestimated radiation dose by 47.6%, 39.4%, 27%, and 12.3% (P < .001) for effective diameter groups 1 to 4, respectively, when compared to SSDE. CT dose parameters, age, weight, Dw, and mean effective diameter were variables associated with higher radiation doses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CTDIvol systematically underestimated radiation dose in comparison to SSDE in pediatric patients submitted to chest CT and should not be used as the primary parameter to monitor CT protocols in these patients. SSDE calculated according to effective diameter also underestimates the radiation dose compared to SSDE calculated based on water equivalent.</p>","PeriodicalId":20795,"journal":{"name":"Radiation protection dosimetry","volume":" ","pages":"2008-2013"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation protection dosimetry","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncae212","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the radiation dose of chest computed tomography (CT) examinations of pediatric patients and the extent to which volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) underestimates radiation dose in comparison to size specific dose estimates (SSDE).
Methods: Single-center, retrospective study of consecutive unenhanced pediatric (age <18 years) chest CTs between October 2015 and October 2016. Radiation dose as well as demographic and clinical data were recorded from 133 chest CTs. Patients were grouped into 4 categories based on mean effective diameter of the chest. SSDE was generated for each patient according to the water equivalent and effective diameter and compared to CTDIvol. Factors associated with higher radiation doses were assessed.
Results: CTDIvol underestimated radiation dose by 54.7%, 47.6%, 40.2%, and 31.2% (P < .001) for effective diameter groups 1 to 4, respectively, when compared to SSDE (calculated according to the water equivalent). When calculated according to the effective diameter, CTDIvol underestimated radiation dose by 47.6%, 39.4%, 27%, and 12.3% (P < .001) for effective diameter groups 1 to 4, respectively, when compared to SSDE. CT dose parameters, age, weight, Dw, and mean effective diameter were variables associated with higher radiation doses.
Conclusion: CTDIvol systematically underestimated radiation dose in comparison to SSDE in pediatric patients submitted to chest CT and should not be used as the primary parameter to monitor CT protocols in these patients. SSDE calculated according to effective diameter also underestimates the radiation dose compared to SSDE calculated based on water equivalent.
期刊介绍:
Radiation Protection Dosimetry covers all aspects of personal and environmental dosimetry and monitoring, for both ionising and non-ionising radiations. This includes biological aspects, physical concepts, biophysical dosimetry, external and internal personal dosimetry and monitoring, environmental and workplace monitoring, accident dosimetry, and dosimetry related to the protection of patients. Particular emphasis is placed on papers covering the fundamentals of dosimetry; units, radiation quantities and conversion factors. Papers covering archaeological dating are included only if the fundamental measurement method or technique, such as thermoluminescence, has direct application to personal dosimetry measurements. Papers covering the dosimetric aspects of radon or other naturally occurring radioactive materials and low level radiation are included. Animal experiments and ecological sample measurements are not included unless there is a significant relevant content reason.