Dave Fornell, ITN Editor
Dave Fornell, ITN Editor

Dave Fornell is the editor of Diagnostic & Interventional Cardiology magazine and assistant editor for Imaging Technology News magazine.

Blog | Dave Fornell, ITN Editor | March 16, 2012

How Much CT Dose Did I Receive…Anyone?

By Dave Fornell, DAIC Editor

With increasing concern about radiation dose levels in radiology, I wanted to share my personal opinion on the subject based on my observations in the industry and first-hand experience as a patient.

I recently had two computed tomography (CT) scans performed and having covered the subject of CT dose numerous times, I was curious to see what levels of ionizing radiation I received. I asked for copies of my datasets and the radiology reports and was surprised that the settings to record dose were not turned on. The scanner failed to record the dose length product (DLP) or the CT dose index (CTDI) volume on the DICOM header, which can be used to estimate the millisievert (mSv) dose of the exam.

I don’t believe there is currently any legal requirement to record this information in Illinois, where I had my scan, or anywhere else for that matter. California will become the first state to require the recording of dose this summer, when a new state law goes into effect July 1. There is expectation in the industry this will be the first of many requirements to better monitor medical imaging radiation dose.

My scans were performed to evaluate lower abdominal pain, which turned out to be a urinary tract infection with an odd presentation, being centered in the left ductus deferens. To rule out something more serious in the emergency department (ED), I had a contrast/delayed scan, followed by a non-contrast exam the following day. The contrast scans on a brand-new 64-slice scanner had no dose record. A non-contrast scan I had the following day on another machine at the same hospital did capture my DLP, which I calculated into an estimated dose of 9.5 mSv. The images from my contrast scan were better quality, mainly due to the contrast injection. But I wonder whether the better image quality may also have been due to the technologist turning up the dial to produce better quality pictures. I will never know.

Exposure to radiation is something the public takes quite seriously. But most people have no idea how the radiology world works and are unaware of the actual exposure levels for exams they receive. Even if the dose were recorded, most patients probably would have no idea where to look for that information or how to calculate dose from the cryptic numbers and acronyms on their scans. (This would also be contingent upon the patient being provided a CD containing a DICOM viewer, which does not always work on a patient’s personal computer.)

While it is understandable that the public does not know how to convert these numbers into the estimated dose received, I wonder whether many in the industry are in the same boat. While editing a recent comparison chart for Imaging Technology News (ITN), I was shocked to find none of the major CT manufacturers in the United States answered the following question: “What is the conversion factor used and cited for conversion from DLP to mSv.” This factor is important because it enables a person to look at a CT scan and immediately figure the estimated dose the patient received. I don't know why no one provided this information, because to me it seems important for potential customers to know. It makes me wonder whether this information is being communicated effectively in the field. If operators understand why DLP and the conversion factor are important, they might be more inclined to make sure that the DLP capture is on when CT scans are done.

My life-time cumulative dose is low, so I look at my scans mainly from an academic standpoint. However, my concern would be much higher if I had a chronic condition or combination of ailments requiring numerous or repeated CT scans.

With the major trend in radiology today being to make scans as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), I believe more care should be taken to document dose. There is a good chance this will be required in the future. The American College of Radiology (ACR) started its Dose Index Registry (DIR) more than a year ago and now has more than 1 million scans. Data collected from the DIR will be used to establish national benchmarks for CT dose indices to help ensure that patients receive safe, quality imaging.  However, in order to know where a facility stands in meeting or falling short of these benchmarks, they must first record the doses they are using.

 

Related Content

Video Plus Brochure Helps Patients Make Lung Cancer Scan Decision

Image courtesy of the American Thoracic Society

News | Lung Cancer | April 19, 2019
A short video describing the potential benefits and risks of low-dose computed tomography (CT) screening for lung...
FDA Clears GE's Deep Learning Image Reconstruction Engine
Technology | Computed Tomography (CT) | April 19, 2019
GE Healthcare has received 510(k) clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of its Deep Learning Image...
Qaelum NV and Toyo Corp. Sign Japanese Distribution Agreement for Dose Monitoring Solution
News | Radiation Dose Management | April 10, 2019
Qaelum NV of Leuven, Belgium, and Toyo Corp. of Tokyo, Japan announced they have entered into a cooperation agreement...
Omega Medical Imaging Launches AI-enabled FluoroShield for Radiation Reduction
Technology | Radiation Dose Management | April 04, 2019
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Omega Medical Imaging 510(k) clearance to offer their artificial...
Videos | RSNA | April 03, 2019
ITN Editor Dave Fornell takes a tour of some of the most interesting new medical imaging technologies displa
Johns Hopkins Medicine First in U.S. to Install Canon Medical's Aquilion Precision
News | Computed Tomography (CT) | March 26, 2019
March 26, 2019 — Johns Hopkins Medicine now has access to the first...
At #ACC.19, Siemens unveiled a version of its go.Top platform optimized for cardiovascular imaging. The newly packaged scanner can generate the data needed to do CT-based FFR (fractional flow reserve).

At #ACC.19, Siemens unveiled a version of its go.Top platform optimized for cardiovascular imaging. The newly packaged scanner can generate the data needed to do CT-based FFR (fractional flow reserve). Photo by Greg Freiherr

Feature | Cardiac Imaging | March 22, 2019 | By Greg Freiherr
Reflecting a trend toward the increased use of...
Researchers Use Radiomics to Predict Who Will Benefit from Chemotherapy
News | Radiomics | March 21, 2019
Using data from computed tomography (CT) images, researchers may be able to predict which lung cancer patients will...
HeartFlow Analysis Successfully Stratifies Heart Disease Patients at One Year
News | CT Angiography (CTA) | March 19, 2019
Late-breaking results confirm the HeartFlow FFRct (fractional flow reserve computed tomography) Analysis enables...
Podcast | Cardiac Imaging | March 15, 2019
Debate About Coronary Testing Highlights ACC Session