Debbie J Watson1, Kerry S Coakley. 1. Medical Imaging, Royal Children Hospital, Level 2, Foundation Building, Herston Rd, Herston, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia. debbie_watson@health.qld.gov.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previously published dose reference level (DRL) values may no longer be applicable due to technological advancement. New Australian legislation recommends that local DRLs (LDRLs) are established to monitor the performance and dose of CT examinations. OBJECTIVE: To present paediatric DRL values, in a new clinically applicable format, based on weight and referenced to both the 16-cm- and 32-cm-diameter CT dosimetry phantom sizes. To demonstrate local experience in reporting DRLs in this manner and compare these LDRL values with other published paediatric DRL data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective statistical analysis of dose indices was performed on 1382 CT examinations. The mean CT dose index volume (CTDI(vol)) and dose length product (DLP) are reported from display data on the Toshiba Aquilion 64 scanner (Toshiba Medical, Tochigi, Japan). RESULTS: LDRLs were compiled based on weight and the two CT dosimetry reference phantoms for torso examinations, and for the 16-cm-diameter CT dosimetry phantom for head examinations. CONCLUSION: LDRLs were compiled for the Royal Children's Hospital (RCH) Brisbane for reference by clinicians during routine clinical practice. These are compared to other published DRLs as a quality measure.
BACKGROUND: Previously published dose reference level (DRL) values may no longer be applicable due to technological advancement. New Australian legislation recommends that local DRLs (LDRLs) are established to monitor the performance and dose of CT examinations. OBJECTIVE: To present paediatric DRL values, in a new clinically applicable format, based on weight and referenced to both the 16-cm- and 32-cm-diameter CT dosimetry phantom sizes. To demonstrate local experience in reporting DRLs in this manner and compare these LDRL values with other published paediatric DRL data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective statistical analysis of dose indices was performed on 1382 CT examinations. The mean CT dose index volume (CTDI(vol)) and dose length product (DLP) are reported from display data on the Toshiba Aquilion 64 scanner (Toshiba Medical, Tochigi, Japan). RESULTS: LDRLs were compiled based on weight and the two CT dosimetry reference phantoms for torso examinations, and for the 16-cm-diameter CT dosimetry phantom for head examinations. CONCLUSION: LDRLs were compiled for the Royal Children's Hospital (RCH) Brisbane for reference by clinicians during routine clinical practice. These are compared to other published DRLs as a quality measure.
Authors: Marilyn J Goske; Kimberly E Applegate; Jennifer Boylan; Priscilla F Butler; Michael J Callahan; Brian D Coley; Shawn Farley; Donald P Frush; Marta Hernanz-Schulman; Diego Jaramillo; Neil D Johnson; Sue C Kaste; Gregory Morrison; Keith J Strauss Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Francis R Verdun; Daniel Gutierrez; John Paul Vader; Abbas Aroua; Leonor Trinidad Alamo-Maestre; François Bochud; François Gudinchet Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-04-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael A Moore; Randheer Shailam; Bob Liu; Thomas L Toth; Ellen Grant; Sjirk J Westra Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: D Jackson; K Atkin; F Bettenay; J Clark; M R Ditchfield; J E Grimm; R Linke; G Long; E Onikul; J Pereira; M Phillips; F Wilson; E Paul; S K Goergen Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Timo De Bondt; Tom Mulkens; Federica Zanca; Lotte Pyfferoen; Jan W Casselman; Paul M Parizel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Philip W Chu; Sophronia Yu; Yifei Wang; J Anthony Seibert; Luisa F Cervantes; Nima Kasraie; Cameron A Chu; Rebecca Smith-Bindman Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2021-12-06