Cargando…
Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan
OBJECTIVE: To explore the differences among volumetric CT dose index (CTDI(vol)), body-specific dose assessment (SSDE(ED)) based on effective diameter (ED), and SSDE(WED) based on water equivalent diameter (WED) in evaluating the radiation dose of adult thoracic and abdominal CT scanning. METHODS: F...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8990916/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35402481 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.860968 |
_version_ | 1784683479741497344 |
---|---|
author | He, Jimin Dong, Guanwei Deng, Yi He, Jun Xiu, ZhiGang Feng, Fanzi |
author_facet | He, Jimin Dong, Guanwei Deng, Yi He, Jun Xiu, ZhiGang Feng, Fanzi |
author_sort | He, Jimin |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To explore the differences among volumetric CT dose index (CTDI(vol)), body-specific dose assessment (SSDE(ED)) based on effective diameter (ED), and SSDE(WED) based on water equivalent diameter (WED) in evaluating the radiation dose of adult thoracic and abdominal CT scanning. METHODS: From January 2021 to October 2021, enhanced chest CT scans of 100 patients and enhanced abdomen CT scans of another 100 patients were collected. According to the body mass index (BMI), they can be divided into groups A and D (BMI < 20 kg/m(2)), groups B and E (20 kg/m(2) ≤ BMI ≤ 24.9 kg/m(2)), and groups C and F (BMI > 24.9 kg/m(2)). The CTDIvol, anteroposterior diameter (AP), and the left and rght diameter (LAT) of all the patients were recorded, and the ED, water equivalent diameter (WED), the conversion factor (f(size,ED)), (f(size, WED)), SSDE(ED), and SSDE(WED) were calculated. The differences were compared between the different groups. RESULTS: The AP, LAT, ED, and WED of groups B, E, C, and F were higher than those of groups A and D, and those of groups C and F were higher than those of groups B and E (P < 0.05). The f(size,ED) and f(size, WED) of groups B, E, C, and F are lower than those of groups A and D, and those of groups C and F are lower than those of groups B and E (P < 0.05). CTDI(vol), SSDE(ED), and SSDE(WED) in groups B, E, C, and F are higher than those in groups A and D, and those in groups C and F are higher than those in groups B and E (p < 0.05). In the same group, patients with chest- and abdomen-enhanced have higher SSDE(WED) and SSDE(ED) than CTDI(vol), patients with chest-enhanced CT scans have higher SSDE(WED) than SSDE(ED), and patients with abdomen-enhanced CT scans have higher SSDE(ED) than SSDE(WED) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: CTDIvol and ED-based SSDEED underestimated the radiation dose of the subject exposed, where the patient was actually exposed to a greater dose. However, SSDE(WED) based on WED considers better the difference in patient size and attenuation characteristics, and can more accurately evaluate the radiation dose received by patients of different sizes during the chest and abdomen CT scan. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8990916 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89909162022-04-09 Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan He, Jimin Dong, Guanwei Deng, Yi He, Jun Xiu, ZhiGang Feng, Fanzi Front Surg Surgery OBJECTIVE: To explore the differences among volumetric CT dose index (CTDI(vol)), body-specific dose assessment (SSDE(ED)) based on effective diameter (ED), and SSDE(WED) based on water equivalent diameter (WED) in evaluating the radiation dose of adult thoracic and abdominal CT scanning. METHODS: From January 2021 to October 2021, enhanced chest CT scans of 100 patients and enhanced abdomen CT scans of another 100 patients were collected. According to the body mass index (BMI), they can be divided into groups A and D (BMI < 20 kg/m(2)), groups B and E (20 kg/m(2) ≤ BMI ≤ 24.9 kg/m(2)), and groups C and F (BMI > 24.9 kg/m(2)). The CTDIvol, anteroposterior diameter (AP), and the left and rght diameter (LAT) of all the patients were recorded, and the ED, water equivalent diameter (WED), the conversion factor (f(size,ED)), (f(size, WED)), SSDE(ED), and SSDE(WED) were calculated. The differences were compared between the different groups. RESULTS: The AP, LAT, ED, and WED of groups B, E, C, and F were higher than those of groups A and D, and those of groups C and F were higher than those of groups B and E (P < 0.05). The f(size,ED) and f(size, WED) of groups B, E, C, and F are lower than those of groups A and D, and those of groups C and F are lower than those of groups B and E (P < 0.05). CTDI(vol), SSDE(ED), and SSDE(WED) in groups B, E, C, and F are higher than those in groups A and D, and those in groups C and F are higher than those in groups B and E (p < 0.05). In the same group, patients with chest- and abdomen-enhanced have higher SSDE(WED) and SSDE(ED) than CTDI(vol), patients with chest-enhanced CT scans have higher SSDE(WED) than SSDE(ED), and patients with abdomen-enhanced CT scans have higher SSDE(ED) than SSDE(WED) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: CTDIvol and ED-based SSDEED underestimated the radiation dose of the subject exposed, where the patient was actually exposed to a greater dose. However, SSDE(WED) based on WED considers better the difference in patient size and attenuation characteristics, and can more accurately evaluate the radiation dose received by patients of different sizes during the chest and abdomen CT scan. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-03-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8990916/ /pubmed/35402481 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.860968 Text en Copyright © 2022 He, Dong, Deng, He, Xiu and Feng. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Surgery He, Jimin Dong, Guanwei Deng, Yi He, Jun Xiu, ZhiGang Feng, Fanzi Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title | Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title_full | Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title_short | Comparison of Application Value of Different Radiation Dose Evaluation Methods in Evaluating Radiation Dose of Adult Thoracic and Abdominal CT Scan |
title_sort | comparison of application value of different radiation dose evaluation methods in evaluating radiation dose of adult thoracic and abdominal ct scan |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8990916/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35402481 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.860968 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hejimin comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan AT dongguanwei comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan AT dengyi comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan AT hejun comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan AT xiuzhigang comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan AT fengfanzi comparisonofapplicationvalueofdifferentradiationdoseevaluationmethodsinevaluatingradiationdoseofadultthoracicandabdominalctscan |