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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: He, Jimin, Dong, Guanwei, Deng, Yi, He, Jun, Xiu, ZhiGang, Feng, Fanzi
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