BACKGROUND: CT scans of the brain, sinuses and petrous bones performed as the initial imaging test for a variety of indications have the potential to expose the eye-lens, considered among the most radiosensitive human tissues, to a radiation dose. There are several studies in adults discussing the reduction of orbital dose resulting from the use of commercially available bismuth-impregnated latex shields during CT examinations of the head. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate bismuth shielding-induced artefacts and to provide suggestions for optimal eye-lens shielding in paediatric head CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bismuth shield was placed over the eyelids of 60 consecutive children undergoing head CT. Images were assessed for the presence and severity of artefacts with regard to eye-shield distance and shield wrinkling. An anthropomorphic paediatric phantom and thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) were used to study the effect of eye lens-to-shield distance on shielding efficiency. RESULTS: Shields were tolerated by 56/60 children. Artefacts were absent in 45% of scans. Artefacts on orbits, not affecting and affecting orbit evaluation were noted in 39% and 14% of scans, respectively. Diagnostically insignificant artefacts on intracranial structures were noted in 1 case (2%) with shield misplacement. Mean eye-lens-to-shield distance was 8.8 mm in scans without artefacts, and 4.3 mm and 2.2 mm in scans with unimportant and diagnostically important artefacts, respectively. Artefacts occurred in 8 out of 9 cases with shield wrinkling. Dose reduction remained unchanged for different shield-to-eye distances. CONCLUSION: Bismuth shielding-related artefacts occurring in paediatric head CT are frequent, superficial and diagnostically insignificant when brain pathology is assessed. Shields should be placed 1 cm above the eyes when orbital pathology is addressed. Shield wrinkling should be avoided.
BACKGROUND: CT scans of the brain, sinuses and petrous bones performed as the initial imaging test for a variety of indications have the potential to expose the eye-lens, considered among the most radiosensitive human tissues, to a radiation dose. There are several studies in adults discussing the reduction of orbital dose resulting from the use of commercially available bismuth-impregnated latex shields during CT examinations of the head. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate bismuth shielding-induced artefacts and to provide suggestions for optimal eye-lens shielding in paediatric head CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bismuth shield was placed over the eyelids of 60 consecutive children undergoing head CT. Images were assessed for the presence and severity of artefacts with regard to eye-shield distance and shield wrinkling. An anthropomorphic paediatric phantom and thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs) were used to study the effect of eye lens-to-shield distance on shielding efficiency. RESULTS: Shields were tolerated by 56/60 children. Artefacts were absent in 45% of scans. Artefacts on orbits, not affecting and affecting orbit evaluation were noted in 39% and 14% of scans, respectively. Diagnostically insignificant artefacts on intracranial structures were noted in 1 case (2%) with shield misplacement. Mean eye-lens-to-shield distance was 8.8 mm in scans without artefacts, and 4.3 mm and 2.2 mm in scans with unimportant and diagnostically important artefacts, respectively. Artefacts occurred in 8 out of 9 cases with shield wrinkling. Dose reduction remained unchanged for different shield-to-eye distances. CONCLUSION:Bismuth shielding-related artefacts occurring in paediatric head CT are frequent, superficial and diagnostically insignificant when brain pathology is assessed. Shields should be placed 1 cm above the eyes when orbital pathology is addressed. Shield wrinkling should be avoided.
Authors: Courtney Coursey; Donald P Frush; Terry Yoshizumi; Greta Toncheva; Giao Nguyen; S Bruce Greenberg Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Sangroh Kim; Terry T Yoshizumi; Donald P Frush; Colin Anderson-Evans; Greta Toncheva Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: B Keil; J Wulff; R Schmitt; D Auvanis; D Danova; J T Heverhagen; M Fiebich; B Madsack; R Leppek; K J Klose; K Zink Journal: Rofo Date: 2008-11-28
Authors: A Minamoto; H Taniguchi; N Yoshitani; S Mukai; T Yokoyama; T Kumagami; Y Tsuda; H K Mishima; T Amemiya; E Nakashima; K Neriishi; A Hida; S Fujiwara; G Suzuki; M Akahoshi Journal: Int J Radiat Biol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 2.694
Authors: Matthias S May; Michael Brand; Michael M Lell; Martin Sedlmair; Thomas Allmendinger; Michael Uder; Wolfgang Wuest Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-01-16 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Maria I Argyropoulou; George A Alexiou; Vassileios G Xydis; Catherine Adamsbaum; Jean-Francois Chateil; Andrea Rossi; Nadine Girard; Élida Vázquez; Loukas G Astrakas Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 2.804