Evidence of dose saving in routine CT practice using iterative reconstruction derived from a national diagnostic reference level survey

Thomas, Peter; Hayton, Anna; Beveridge, Toby Ean; Marks, Paul; Wallace, Anthony

doi:10.1259/bjr.20150380

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is comparable to a study conducted in Australia which found 69% of scanners used iterative reconstruction. 8 Iterative reconstruction is claimed to allow a dose reduction whilst still maintaining a similar image quality to conventional filtered back projection reconstructed images. 7,9 Table 8 shows that the use of iterative reconstruction resulted in a reduction of 24% on the third quartile value of the mean CTDI vol values, but only 4% of the DLP value.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doses from cervical spine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK

Holroyd

Edyvean

2018

The British Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To review doses to patients undergoing cervical spine CT examinations in the UK. Methods: A data collection form was developed and distributed to medical physicists and radiographers via e-mail distribution lists. The form requested details of CT scanners, exposure protocols and patient dose index information. Results: Data were received for 73 scanners. It was seen that 97% of scanners used automatic exposure control, and 60% of scanners used an iterative reconstruction technique for cervical spine examinations. The majority of scans were taken at 120 kV. The average patient dose indicators in terms of CT dose index (CTDIvol) ranged from 3.5 to 39.7 mGy (mean value 16.7 mGy), and for the DLP, ranged from 87 to 1030 mGy cm (mean value 379 mGy cm) as quoted for the standard 32 cm phantom. Conclusion: The rounded third quartile value of the mean dose distributions from this study were a CT dose index (CTDIvol) of 20 mGy and a dose–length product of 440 mGy cm as quoted for a 32 cm body phantom. These are significantly higher than those in the 2011 Public Health England CT dose survey when adjusted for phantom size. It is suggested that the existing national diagnostic reference levels for cervical spine CT should be amended, both with the new values and also to quote according to the 32 cm phantom. Advances in knowledge: Proposed new national diagnostic reference levels are presented for cervical spine CT examinations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doses from cervical spine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK

Holroyd

Edyvean

2018

The British Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As previously reported (6)(7)(8)(9)13,14,16,18,19,(21)(22)(23)(26)(27)(28)(29), IR algorithms enable a lower radiation dose for body CT acquisitions while preserving image quality. An evaluation of the 50% dose CT protocol by our four readers confirmed these findings, as diagnostic confidence was maintained and the subjective image quality of the reduced-dose images was still above average when compared to the reference, 100% dose images.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Iterative Reconstructions in Reduced-Dose CT

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This indicator was added to the technique data collected through the NDRLS data portal in April 2013. In 2015, ARPANSA published an analysis showing that median dose values were typically 20–30% lower with the use of iterative reconstruction 17 . The proportion of surveys received by the NDRLS that indicate the use of some form of iterative reconstruction has grown over the years and now sits at about 90%, 15 so this would appear to be at least one factor contributing to the observed reduction in dose.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

National diagnostic reference levels: What they are, why we need them and what’s next

Thomas¹

2022

J Med Imag Rad Onc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are an optimisation tool for medical imaging procedures using ionising radiation. They give an indication of the expected radiation dose received by an average-sized patient undergoing a given imaging procedure. Comparison of typical (median) exposure levels for common imaging procedures with DRLs helps imaging facilities identify procedures that may be amenable to further optimisation. Undertaking comparisons with published DRLs is a requirement for medical imaging facilities under the Code for Radiation Protection in Medical Exposure and for their access to Medicare rebates under the Diagnostic Imaging Accreditation Scheme (DIAS). The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency has created the National Diagnostic Reference Level Service to facilitate the collection of data for the establishment of national DRLs in Australia and to assist imaging facilities in comparing their typical doses with the national DRLs. National DRLs have been established in computed tomography, nuclear medicine, and for image-guided and interventional procedures. DRLs must be subject to ongoing review and revision by the national authority to ensure they reflect current practice. This ongoing cycle of assessment and review helps to ensure that the ratio of benefit to risk for patients is maximised.

show abstract

Evidence of dose saving in routine CT practice using iterative reconstruction derived from a national diagnostic reference level survey

Cited by 8 publications

References 20 publications

Doses from cervical spine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK

Doses from cervical spine computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK

Iterative Reconstructions in Reduced-Dose CT

National diagnostic reference levels: What they are, why we need them and what’s next

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About