Personalized Feedback on Staff Dose in Fluoroscopy-Guided Interventions: A New Era in Radiation Dose Monitoring

Radiation safety and protection are a key component of fluoroscopy-guided interventions. We hypothesize that providing weekly personal dose feedback will increase radiation awareness and ultimately will lead to optimized behavior. Therefore, we designed and implemented a personalized feedback of procedure and personal doses for medical staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions. Medical staff (physicians and technicians, n = 27) involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions were equipped with electronic personal dose meters (PDMs). Procedure dose data including the dose area product and effective doses from PDMs were prospectively monitored for each consecutive procedure over an 8-month period (n = 1082). A personalized feedback form was designed displaying for each staff individually the personal dose per procedure, as well as relative and cumulative doses. This study consisted of two phases: (1) 1-5th months: Staff did not receive feedback (n = 701) and (2) 6-8th months: Staff received weekly individual dose feedback (n = 381). An anonymous evaluation was performed on the feedback and occupational dose. Personalized feedback was scored valuable by 76% of the staff and increased radiation dose awareness for 71%. 57 and 52% reported an increased feeling of occupational safety and changing their behavior because of personalized feedback, respectively. For technicians, the normalized dose was significantly lower in the feedback phase compared to the prefeedback phase: [median (IQR) normalized dose (phase 1) 0.12 (0.04-0.50) A mu Sv/Gy cm(2) versus (phase 2) 0.08 (0.02-0.24) A mu Sv/Gy cm(2), p = 0.002]. Personalized dose feedback increases radiation awareness and safety and can be provided to staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions

Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to find the lowest possible tube current and the optimal iterative reconstruction (IR) strength in abdominal imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Reconstruction software was used to insert noise, simulating the use of a lower tube current. A semi-anthropomorphic abdominal phantom (Quality Assurance in Radiology and Medicine, QSA-543, Moehrendorf, Germany) was used to validate the performance of the ReconCT software (S1 Appendix). Thirty abdominal CT scans performed with a standard protocol (120 kVref, 150 mAsref) scanned at 90 kV, with dedicated contrast media (CM) injection software were selected. There were no other in- or exclusion criteria. The software was used to insert noise as if the scans were performed with 90, 80, 70 and 60% of the full dose. Consequently, the different scans were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and IR strength 2, 3 and 4. Both objective (e.g. Hounsfield units [HU], signal to noise ratio [SNR] and contrast to noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective image quality were evaluated. In addition, lesion detection was graded by two radiologists in consensus in another 30 scans (identical scan protocol) with various liver lesions, reconstructed with IR 3, 4 and 5. RESULTS: A tube current of 60% still led to diagnostic objective image quality (e.g. SNR and CNR) when IR strength 3 or 4 were used. IR strength 4 was preferred for lesion detection. The subjective image quality was rated highest for the scans performed at 90% with IR 4. CONCLUSION: A tube current reduction of 10-40% is possible in case IR 4 is used, leading to the highest image quality (10%) or still diagnostic image quality (40%), shown by a pairwise comparison in the same patients

Finding the optimal tube current and iterative reconstruction strength in liver imaging; two needles in one haystack

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to find the lowest possible tube current and the optimal iterative reconstruction (IR) strength in abdominal imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Reconstruction software was used to insert noise, simulating the use of a lower tube current. A semi-anthropomorphic abdominal phantom (Quality Assurance in Radiology and Medicine, QSA-543, Moehrendorf, Germany) was used to validate the performance of the ReconCT software (S1 Appendix). Thirty abdominal CT scans performed with a standard protocol (120 kV(ref), 150 mAs(ref)) scanned at 90 kV, with dedicated contrast media (CM) injection software were selected. There were no other in- or exclusion criteria. The software was used to insert noise as if the scans were performed with 90, 80, 70 and 60% of the full dose. Consequently, the different scans were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and IR strength 2, 3 and 4. Both objective (e.g. Hounsfield units [HU], signal to noise ratio [SNR] and contrast to noise ratio [CNR]) and subjective image quality were evaluated. In addition, lesion detection was graded by two radiologists in consensus in another 30 scans (identical scan protocol) with various liver lesions, reconstructed with IR 3, 4 and 5. RESULTS: A tube current of 60% still led to diagnostic objective image quality (e.g. SNR and CNR) when IR strength 3 or 4 were used. IR strength 4 was preferred for lesion detection. The subjective image quality was rated highest for the scans performed at 90% with IR 4. CONCLUSION: A tube current reduction of 10–40% is possible in case IR 4 is used, leading to the highest image quality (10%) or still diagnostic image quality (40%), shown by a pairwise comparison in the same patients

Leukemia and brain tumors among children after radiation exposure from CT scans: design and methodological opportunities of the Dutch Pediatric CT Study.

Computed tomography (CT) scans are indispensable in modern medicine; however, the spectacular rise in global use coupled with relatively high doses of ionizing radiation per examination have raised radiation protection concerns. Children are of particular concern because they are more sensitive to radiation-induced cancer compared with adults and have a long lifespan to express harmful effects which may offset clinical benefits of performing a scan. This paper describes the design and methodology of a nationwide study, the Dutch Pediatric CT Study, regarding risk of leukemia and brain tumors in children after radiation exposure from CT scans. It is a retrospective record-linkage cohort study with an expected number of 100,000 children who received at least one electronically archived CT scan covering the calendar period since the introduction of digital archiving until 2012. Information on all archived CT scans of these children will be obtained, including date of examination, scanned body part and radiologist's report, as well as the machine settings required for organ dose estimation. We will obtain cancer incidence by record linkage with external databases. In this article, we describe several approaches to the collection of data on archived CT scans, the estimation of radiation doses and the assessment of confounding. The proposed approaches provide useful strategies for data collection and confounder assessment for general retrospective record-linkage studies, particular those using hospital databases on radiological procedures for the assessment of exposure to ionizing or non-ionizing radiation

Real-Time Patient and Staff Radiation Dose Monitoring in IR Practice

PURPOSE: Knowledge of medical radiation exposure permits application of radiation protection principles. In our center, the first dedicated real-time, automated patient and staff dose monitoring system (DoseWise Portal, Philips Healthcare) was installed. Aim of this study was to obtain insight in the procedural and occupational doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All interventional radiologists, vascular surgeons, and technicians wore personal dose meters (PDMs, DoseAware, Philips Healthcare). The dose monitoring system simultaneously registered for each procedure dose-related data as the dose area product (DAP) and effective staff dose (E) from PDMs. Use and type of shielding were recorded separately. All procedures were analyzed according to procedure type; these included among others cerebral interventions (n = 112), iliac and/or caval venous recanalization procedures (n = 68), endovascular aortic repair procedures (n = 63), biliary duct interventions (n = 58), and percutaneous gastrostomy procedure (n = 28). RESULTS: Median (±IQR) DAP doses ranged from 2.0 (0.8–3.1) (percutaneous gastrostomy) to 84 (53–147) Gy cm(2) (aortic repair procedures). Median (±IQR) first operator doses ranged from 1.6 (1.1–5.0) μSv to 33.4 (12.1–125.0) for these procedures, respectively. The relative exposure, determined as first operator dose normalized to procedural DAP, ranged from 1.9 in biliary interventions to 0.1 μSv/Gy cm(2) in cerebral interventions, indicating large variation in staff dose per unit DAP among the procedure types. CONCLUSION: Real-time dose monitoring was able to identify the types of interventions with either an absolute or relatively high staff dose, and may allow for specific optimization of radiation protection