No abstract

Patient doses for a few common fluoroscopy-guided procedures in interventional radiology (IR) (excluding cardiology) were collected from a few radiological departments in 13 European countries. The major aim was to evaluate patient doses for the basis of the reference levels. In total, data for 20 procedures for about 1300 patients were collected. There were many-fold variations in the number of IR equipment and procedures per population, in the entrance dose rates, and in the patient dose data (total dose area product or DAP, fluoroscopy time and number of frames). There was no clear correlation between the total DAP and entrance dose rate, or between the total DAP and fluoroscopy time, indicating that a number of parameters affect the differences. Because of the limited number of patients, preliminary reference levels were proposed only for a few procedures. There is a need to improve the optimisation of IR procedures and their definitions and grouping, in order to account for their different complexities.

In interventional radiology, for an accurate determination of effective dose to the staff, measurements with two dosemeters have been recommended, one located above and one under the protective apron. Such 'double dosimetry' practices and the algorithms used for the determination of effective dose were reviewed in this study by circulating a questionnaire and by an extensive literature search. The results indicated that regulations for double dosimetry almost do not exist and there is no firm consensus on the most suitable calculation algorithms. The calculation of effective dose is mainly based on the single dosemeter measurements, in which either personal dose equivalent, directly, (dosemeter below the apron) or a fraction of personal dose equivalent (dosemeter above the apron) is taken as an assessment of effective dose. The most recent studies suggest that there might not be just one double dosimetry algorithm that would be optimum for all interventional radiology procedures. Further investigations in several critical configurations of interventional radiology procedures are needed to assess the suitability of the proposed algorithms.

No abstract

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.