Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Abdominal Radiology
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 3/2016

12.03.2016

Imaging wisely: patient safety in CT

verfasst von: Zheng Feng Lu, Stephen Thomas

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 3/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The past decade has seen a significant growth in diagnostic CT imaging as a direct result of the clinical value provided by CT imaging. At the same time, many new techniques and resources are now available to make CT imaging safe. This article presents the basics of CT dosimetry and their usage in clinical practices, methods to implement CT dose reduction, followed by a summary of legislation, and guidelines related to patient safety in diagnostic CT imaging. Also, CT radiation dose diagnostic reference levels from published regional and national surveys are reviewed and applied in a CT dose tracking and monitoring program.
Literatur
1.
2.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (2009) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report No. 160 ed. Bethesda, MD: NCRP
3.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (1987) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report No. 93 ed. Bethesda, MD: NCRP
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Jucius RA, Kambic GX (1977) Radiation dosimetry in computed tomography. Appl Opt Instrum Eng Med. 127:286–295
9.
Shope TB, Gagne RM, Johnson GC (1981) A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission X-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 8(4):488–495CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Nickoloff EL, Dutta AK, Lu ZF (2003) Influence of phantom diameter, kVp and scan mode upon computed tomography dose index. Med Phys 30(3):395–402CrossRefPubMed
12.
Boone J, Strauss K, Cody D, McCollough C, McNitt-Gray M, Toth T (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT exams: Report of AAPM Task Group 204
13.
McCollough C, Bakalyar DM, Bostani M, Brady S, Boedeker K, Boone JM, et al. (2014) Use of water equivalent diameter for calculating patient size and size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in CT: the Report of AAPM Task Group 220
14.
15.
Jones DG, Shrimpton PC (1991) Survey of CT practice in the UK. Part 3: normalised organ doses calculated using monte carlo techniques. Chilton
16.
The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (2007) ICRP Publication 103, Ann. ICRP 37 (2–4), ICRP
17.
Deak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA (2010) Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology 257(1):158–166CrossRefPubMed
18.
Blitman NM, Anwar M, Brady KB, Taragin BH, Freeman K (2015) Value of focused appendicitis ultrasound and alvarado score in predicting appendicitis in children: Can we reduce the use of CT? Am J Roentgenol 204(6):W707–W712CrossRef
19.
Spalluto LB, Woodfield CA, DeBenedectis CM, Lazarus E (2012) MR imaging evaluation of abdominal pain during pregnancy: appendicitis and other nonobstetric causes. RadioGraphics 32(2):317–334CrossRefPubMed
20.
Patz EF Jr, Erasmus JJ, McAdams HP, et al. (1999) Lung cancer staging and management: comparison of contrast-enhanced and nonenhanced helical CT of the thorax. Radiology 212(1):56–60CrossRefPubMed
21.
Levin DC, Parker L, Halpern EJ, Rao VM (2014) Are combined CT scans of the thorax being overused? J Am Coll Radiol 11(8):788–790CrossRefPubMed
22.
Sadigh G, Applegate KE, Baumgarten DA (2014) Comparative accuracy of intravenous contrast-enhanced CT versus noncontrast CT plus intravenous contrast-enhanced CT in the detection and characterization of patients with hypervascular liver metastases: a critically appraised topic. Acad Radiol 21(1):113–125CrossRefPubMed
23.
Fletcher JG, Wiersema MJ, Farrell MA, et al. (2003) Pancreatic malignancy: value of arterial, pancreatic, and hepatic phase imaging with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 229(1):81–90CrossRefPubMed
24.
Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233(3):649–657CrossRefPubMed
25.
Bae KT (2010) Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology 256(1):32–61CrossRefPubMed
26.
Patino M, Fuentes JM, Singh S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV (2015) Iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominopelvic CT: technical concepts and clinical implementation. Am J Roentgenol 205(1):W19–W31CrossRef
27.
Prepublication requirements: revised requirements for diagnostic imaging services, issued January 9, 2015, effective July 1, 2015. The Joint Commission 2015.
28.
Cody DD, Pfeiffer D, McNitt-Gray MF, Ruckdeschel TG, Strauss KJ (2012) ACR computed tomography quality control manual. American College of Radiology
29.
Shih G, Lu ZF, Zabih R, et al. (2011) Automated framework for digital radiation dose index reporting from CT dose reports. Am J Roentgenol 197(5):1170–1174CrossRef
30.
31.
32.
Radiation protection (1997) Protection from potential exposures: application to selected radiation sources. A report of a task group of the International Commission on Radiation Protection. Ann ICRP 27(2):1–61
33.
Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Meeson S, Golding SJ, Public Health E, Centre for Radiation C, et al. (2014) Doses from computer tomography (CT) examinations in the UK, 2011 review
34.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (2012) Reference levels and achievable doses in medical and dental imaging: recommendations for the United States. Report No. 172. Bethesda: NCRP
35.
Christianson O, Li X, Frush D, Samei E (2012) Automated size-specific CT dose monitoring program: assessing variability in CT dose. Med Phys 39(11):7131–7139CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Brink JA, Miller DL (2015) U.S. national diagnostic reference levels: closing the gap. Radiology 277(1):3–6CrossRefPubMed
38.
Escalon JG, Chatfield MB, Sengupta D, Loftus ML (2015) Dose length products for the 10 most commonly ordered CT examinations in adults: analysis of three years of the ACR dose index registry. J Am Coll Radiol 12(8):815–823CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
Smith-Bindman R, Moghadassi M, Wilson N, et al. (2015) Radiation doses in consecutive CT examinations from five University of California Medical Centers. Radiology 277(1):134–141CrossRefPubMed
41.
MacGregor K, Li I, Dowdell T, Gray BG (2015) Identifying institutional diagnostic reference levels for CT with radiation dose index monitoring software. Radiology 276(2):507–517CrossRefPubMed
42.
McCollough CH, Bushberg JT, Fletcher JG, Eckel LJ (2015) Answers to Common Questions About the Use and Safety of CT Scans. Mayo Clin Proc 90(10):1380–1392CrossRefPubMed
43.
44.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (2012) Uncertainties in the estimation of radiation risks and probability of disease causation. Report No. 171. Bethesda, MD: NCRP
45.
46.
Metadaten
Titel
Imaging wisely: patient safety in CT
verfasst von
Zheng Feng Lu
Stephen Thomas
Publikationsdatum
12.03.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 3/2016
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0676-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2016

Abdominal Radiology 3/2016 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Applications of process improvement techniques to improve workflow in abdominal imaging

OriginalPaper

Transitioning from peer review to peer learning for abdominal radiologists

OriginalPaper

Acute pyelonephritis in transplanted kidneys: can diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging be useful for diagnosis and follow-up?

OriginalPaper

Acute gastrointestinal vaso-occlusive ischemia in sickle cell disease: CT imaging features and clinical outcome

OriginalPaper

Quality assurance methodology and applications to abdominal imaging PQI

OriginalPaper

Measurement of pancreatic cystic lesions on magnetic resonance imaging: efficacy of standards in reducing inter-observer variability

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

28.04.2024 Schwindel Nachrichten

Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise