Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 2/2011

01-09-2011 | ALARA-CT

CT dose reduction in practice

Author: Michael J. Callahan

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Special Issue 2/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Greater than 10% of diagnostic imaging studies performed in developed countries are CT examinations. In the United States, as many as 60 million CT studies are performed each year, up to 7 million of which are performed in pediatric patients. In the spirit of the ALARA principle, both adult and pediatric radiologists should strive to decrease pediatric radiation exposure whenever possible. This can be achieved by utilizing imaging studies that do not require the use of ionizing radiation, thus decreasing the number of CT studies performed. If a CT study is indicated, the delivered dose should be optimized to use the lowest possible dose level while still answering the clinical question.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Verdun FR, Bochud F, Gudinchet F et al (2008) Quality initiatives* radiation risk: what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics 28:1807–1816PubMedCrossRef Verdun FR, Bochud F, Gudinchet F et al (2008) Quality initiatives* radiation risk: what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics 28:1807–1816PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. New Engl J Med 357:2277–2284PubMedCrossRef Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. New Engl J Med 357:2277–2284PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Brody AS, Frush DP, Huda W et al (2007) Radiation risk to children from computed tomography. Pediatrics 120:677–682PubMedCrossRef Brody AS, Frush DP, Huda W et al (2007) Radiation risk to children from computed tomography. Pediatrics 120:677–682PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Townsend BA, Callahan MJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Has pediatric CT at children’s hospitals reached its peak? AJR 194:1194–1196PubMedCrossRef Townsend BA, Callahan MJ, Zurakowski D et al (2010) Has pediatric CT at children’s hospitals reached its peak? AJR 194:1194–1196PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Slovis TL (2002) The ALARA concept in pediatric CT intelligent dose reduction. Pediatr Radiol 32:219–220CrossRef Slovis TL (2002) The ALARA concept in pediatric CT intelligent dose reduction. Pediatr Radiol 32:219–220CrossRef
6.
go back to reference National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (2010) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report NCRP 160. NCRPM, Washington, D.C National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (2010) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report NCRP 160. NCRPM, Washington, D.C
7.
go back to reference Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB (2008) Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff (Millwood) 27:1491–1502CrossRef Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB (2008) Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff (Millwood) 27:1491–1502CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Boone JM, Geraghty EM, Seibert JA et al (2003) Dose reduction in pediatric CT: a rational approach. Radiology 228:352–360PubMedCrossRef Boone JM, Geraghty EM, Seibert JA et al (2003) Dose reduction in pediatric CT: a rational approach. Radiology 228:352–360PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512PubMedCrossRef McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26:503–512PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Wilting JE, Zwartkruis A, van Leeuwen MS et al (2001) A rational approach to dose reduction in CT: individualized scan protocols. Eur Radiol 11:2627–2632PubMedCrossRef Wilting JE, Zwartkruis A, van Leeuwen MS et al (2001) A rational approach to dose reduction in CT: individualized scan protocols. Eur Radiol 11:2627–2632PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657PubMedCrossRef Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL et al (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233:649–657PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Strauss KJ, Goske MJ, Kaste SC et al (2010) Image Gently: ten steps you can take to optimize image quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. AJR 194:868–873PubMedCrossRef Strauss KJ, Goske MJ, Kaste SC et al (2010) Image Gently: ten steps you can take to optimize image quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. AJR 194:868–873PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR et al (2006) Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT. Radiographics 26:1785–1794PubMedCrossRef Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR et al (2006) Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT. Radiographics 26:1785–1794PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Gies M, Kalender WA, Wolf H et al (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation: Simulation studies. Med Phys 26:2235–2247PubMedCrossRef Gies M, Kalender WA, Wolf H et al (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation: Simulation studies. Med Phys 26:2235–2247PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation: phantom measurements. Med Phys 26:2248–2253PubMedCrossRef Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C (1999) Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation: phantom measurements. Med Phys 26:2248–2253PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Haaga JR, Miraldi F, MacIntyre W et al (1981) The effect of mAs variation upon computed tomography image quality as evaluated by in vivo and in vitro studies. Radiology 138:449–454PubMed Haaga JR, Miraldi F, MacIntyre W et al (1981) The effect of mAs variation upon computed tomography image quality as evaluated by in vivo and in vitro studies. Radiology 138:449–454PubMed
17.
18.
go back to reference Li J, Udayasankar UK, Toth TL et al (2007) Automatic patient centering for MDCT: effect on radiation dose. AJR 188:547–552PubMedCrossRef Li J, Udayasankar UK, Toth TL et al (2007) Automatic patient centering for MDCT: effect on radiation dose. AJR 188:547–552PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS et al (2001) Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: strategies at a large children’s hospital. AJR 176:303–330PubMed Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS et al (2001) Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: strategies at a large children’s hospital. AJR 176:303–330PubMed
20.
go back to reference Kim J, Newman B (2010) Evaluation of a radiation dose reduction strategy for pediatric chest CT. AJR 194:1188–1193PubMedCrossRef Kim J, Newman B (2010) Evaluation of a radiation dose reduction strategy for pediatric chest CT. AJR 194:1188–1193PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
CT dose reduction in practice
Author
Michael J. Callahan
Publication date
01-09-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue Special Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-011-2099-y

Other articles of this Special Issue 2/2011

Pediatric Radiology 2/2011 Go to the issue