The validity and reliability of the exposure index as a metric for estimating the radiation dose to the patient

Introduction With the introduction of digital radiography, the feedback between image quality and over-exposure has been partly lost which in some cases has led to a steady increase in dose. Over the years the introduction of exposure index (EI) has been used to resolve this phenomenon referred to as ‘dose creep’. Even though EI is often vendor specific it is always a related of the radiation exposure to the detector. Due to the nature of this relationship EI can also be used as a patient dose indicator, however this is not widely investigated in literature. Methods A total of 420 dose-area-product (DAP) and EI measurements were taken whilst varying kVp, mAs and body habitus on two different anthropomorphic phantoms (pelvis and chest). Using linear regression, the correlation between EI and DAP were examined. Additionally, two separate region of interest (ROI) placements/per phantom where examined in order to research any effect on EI. Results When dividing the data into subsets, a strong correlation between EI and DAP was shown with all R-squared values > 0.987. Comparison between the ROI placements showed a significant difference between EIs for both placements. Conclusion This research shows a clear relationship between EI and radiation dose which is dependent on a wide variety of factors such as ROI placement, body habitus. In addition, pathology and manufacturer specific EI’s are likely to be of influence as well. Implications for practice The combination of DAP and EI might be used as a patient dose indicator. However, the influencing factors as mentioned in the conclusion should be considered and examined before implementation

A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). CAPRIE Steering Committee

Many clinical trials have evaluated the benefit of long-term use of antiplatelet drugs in reducing the risk of clinical thrombotic events. Aspirin and ticlopidine have been shown to be effective, but both have potentially serious adverse effects. Clopidogrel, a new thienopyridine derivative similar to ticlopidine, is an inhibitor of platelet aggregation induced by adenosine diphosphate. METHODS: CAPRIE was a randomised, blinded, international trial designed to assess the relative efficacy of clopidogrel (75 mg once daily) and aspirin (325 mg once daily) in reducing the risk of a composite outcome cluster of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death; their relative safety was also assessed. The population studied comprised subgroups of patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease manifested as either recent ischaemic stroke, recent myocardial infarction, or symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Patients were followed for 1 to 3 years. FINDINGS: 19,185 patients, with more than 6300 in each of the clinical subgroups, were recruited over 3 years, with a mean follow-up of 1.91 years. There were 1960 first events included in the outcome cluster on which an intention-to-treat analysis showed that patients treated with clopidogrel had an annual 5.32% risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death compared with 5.83% with aspirin. These rates reflect a statistically significant (p = 0.043) relative-risk reduction of 8.7% in favour of clopidogrel (95% Cl 0.3-16.5). Corresponding on-treatment analysis yielded a relative-risk reduction of 9.4%. There were no major differences in terms of safety. Reported adverse experiences in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups judged to be severe included rash (0.26% vs 0.10%), diarrhoea (0.23% vs 0.11%), upper gastrointestinal discomfort (0.97% vs 1.22%), intracranial haemorrhage (0.33% vs 0.47%), and gastrointestinal haemorrhage (0.52% vs 0.72%), respectively. There were ten (0.10%) patients in the clopidogrel group with significant reductions in neutrophils (< 1.2 x 10(9)/L) and 16 (0.17%) in the aspirin group. INTERPRETATION: Long-term administration of clopidogrel to patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease is more effective than aspirin in reducing the combined risk of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. The overall safety profile of clopidogrel is at least as good as that of medium-dose aspirin