Individually Adapted Examination Protocols for Reduction of Radiation Exposure for 16-MDCT Chest Examinations
Marco Das1,
Andreas Horst Mahnken1,
Georg Mühlenbruch1,
Achim Stargardt1,
Claudia Weiß2,
Dirk-Alexander Sennst3,
Thomas G. Flohr4,
Rolf W. Günther1 and
Joachim Ernst Wildberger1
1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital, University of
Technology (RWTH), Pauwelsstrasse 30, D-52074 Aachen, Germany.
2 Institute of Medical Statistics, RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
3 Institute of Medical Physics, Erlangen, Germany.
4 Siemens Medical Solutions, Computed Tomography, Forchheim, Germany.
View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1. —Ratio between body weight (kg) and image noise (SD) at 100
mAseffective. bweight = 0.0676 (H/kg),
b1weight = 3.52269 (H).
|
|
View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2. —Ratio between body-mass index (BMI = kg/m2) and
image noise (SD) at 100 mAseffective ("standard"-dose
protocol). bBMI = 0.2449 (H/kg), b1BMI = 2.0459 (H).
|
|
View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3. —Ratio between body weight (kg) and image noise (SD) for
CareDose group. bweight = 0.0979 (H/kg), b1weight =
2.0658 (H).
|
|
View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4. —Ratio between body-mass index (BMI = kg/m2) and
image noise (SD) for CareDose protocol. bBMI = 0.3151 (H/kg),
b1BMI = 1.3534 (H).
|
|
View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5. —Ratio between body weight (kg) and image noise (SD) for
weight-adapted group. bweight = –0.0087 (H/kg),
b1weight = 9.6232 (H).
|
|
View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6. —Ratio between body-mass index (BMI = kg/m2) and
image noise (SD) for weight-adapted protocol. bBMI = –0.0019
(H/kg), b1BMI = 9.0476 (H).
|
|
View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7. —Ratio between body weight (kg) and image noise (SD) for
combined group (weight-adapted and CareDose). bweight = 0.0525
(H/kg), b1weight = 6.1636 (H).
|
|
View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8. —Ratio between body-mass index (BMI = kg/m2) and
image noise (SD) for combined protocol (weight-adapted and CareDose).
bBMI = 0.2336 (H/kg), b1BMI = 4.1119 (H]).
|
|
View larger version (89K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9A. —63-year-old woman with Hodgkin's lymphoma, with weight of 59
kg, height of 1.65 m, BMI of 21.67, and mAseffective = 54.
Excellent image quality was obtained (group 4 = weight-adapted and CareDose).
Soft-tissue settings and lung-tissue settings reveal excellent depiction of
anatomic detail. Calculated effective dose was 4.0 mSv compared with 7.4 mSv
if standard mAs settings would have been applied. Consecutive dose saving was
46%.
|
|
View larger version (72K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9B. —63-year-old woman with Hodgkin's lymphoma, with weight of 59
kg, height of 1.65 m, BMI of 21.67, and mAseffective = 54.
Excellent image quality was obtained (group 4 = weight-adapted and CareDose).
Soft-tissue settings and lung-tissue settings reveal excellent depiction of
anatomic detail. Calculated effective dose was 4.0 mSv compared with 7.4 mSv
if standard mAs settings would have been applied. Consecutive dose saving was
46%.
|
|
View larger version (86K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10A. —53-year-old woman with breast cancer scanned for lung
metastasis, with weight of 50 kg, height of 1.65 m, 18.37 BMI, and
mAseffective = 42. Excellent image quality was obtained in combined
group (weight-adapted and CareDose).
|
|
View larger version (66K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10B. —53-year-old woman with breast cancer scanned for lung
metastasis, with weight of 50 kg, height of 1.65 m, 18.37 BMI, and
mAseffective = 42. Excellent image quality was obtained in combined
group (weight-adapted and CareDose).
|
|
View larger version (78K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10C. —53-year-old woman with breast cancer scanned for lung
metastasis, with weight of 50 kg, height of 1.65 m, 18.37 BMI, and
mAseffective = 42. Two weeks later, examination was performed (off
protocol to follow pleural effusion) with routine settings (mAseff
= 100). Excellent image quality was obtained in both examinations. Calculated
effective dose was 3.2 mSv (combined group) compared with 7.7 mSv (standard
dose). Consecutive dose saving was 58%.
|
|
View larger version (61K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10D. —53-year-old woman with breast cancer scanned for lung
metastasis, with weight of 50 kg, height of 1.65 m, 18.37 BMI, and
mAseffective = 42. Two weeks later, examination was performed (off
protocol to follow pleural effusion) with routine settings (mAseff
= 100). Excellent image quality was obtained in both examinations. Calculated
effective dose was 3.2 mSv (combined group) compared with 7.7 mSv (standard
dose). Consecutive dose saving was 58%.
|
|
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Copyright © 2005 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.
