BACKGROUND: Whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) plays an important role in the management of severely injured patients. We evaluated the radiation exposure of WBCT scans using different positioning boards and arm positions. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the radiation exposure of WBCT using a 16-slice multislice computed tomography scanner was evaluated. Individual effective doses (E, mSV) was calculated. Patients were assigned to two groups according to placement on a plastic transfer mat (PTM, group 1) or on the Trauma Transfer™-Board (TTB, group 2). Data were collected for each group with arm placement on the abdomen (a) or in raising position (b), respectively. The maximum ventro-dorsal diameter [VDD] at the trunk was measured. RESULTS: 100 patients with potentially life-threatening injuries were analysed. Patient demographics and VDD did not differ in the two groups. Radiation exposure in term of E did not reveal any significant differences between the two positioning boards using same arm position [group 1a (n=26) vs. 2a (n=24) (mSV): 16.7±4.7 vs. 17.1±4.4, group 1b (n=26) vs. 2b (n=24) (mSV): 13.1±3.9 vs. 14.3±1.5]. The arm raising positioning showed a significant reduction in E in comparison to the placement on abdomen position [group 1b vs. 1a (mSV): 13.1±3.9 vs. 16.7±4.7, p<0.05, group 2b vs. 2a (mSV): 14.3±1.5 vs. 17.1±4.4, p<0.05]. CONCLUSIONS: Patient arm positioning for WBCT has an important influence on radiation exposure. Effective dose was 16-22% lower when arms were raised. An individual placement algorithm may lead to a relevant reduction of radiation exposure of severely injured patients.
BACKGROUND: Whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) plays an important role in the management of severely injured patients. We evaluated the radiation exposure of WBCT scans using different positioning boards and arm positions. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the radiation exposure of WBCT using a 16-slice multislice computed tomography scanner was evaluated. Individual effective doses (E, mSV) was calculated. Patients were assigned to two groups according to placement on a plastic transfer mat (PTM, group 1) or on the Trauma Transfer™-Board (TTB, group 2). Data were collected for each group with arm placement on the abdomen (a) or in raising position (b), respectively. The maximum ventro-dorsal diameter [VDD] at the trunk was measured. RESULTS: 100 patients with potentially life-threatening injuries were analysed. Patient demographics and VDD did not differ in the two groups. Radiation exposure in term of E did not reveal any significant differences between the two positioning boards using same arm position [group 1a (n=26) vs. 2a (n=24) (mSV): 16.7±4.7 vs. 17.1±4.4, group 1b (n=26) vs. 2b (n=24) (mSV): 13.1±3.9 vs. 14.3±1.5]. The arm raising positioning showed a significant reduction in E in comparison to the placement on abdomen position [group 1b vs. 1a (mSV): 13.1±3.9 vs. 16.7±4.7, p<0.05, group 2b vs. 2a (mSV): 14.3±1.5 vs. 17.1±4.4, p<0.05]. CONCLUSIONS:Patient arm positioning for WBCT has an important influence on radiation exposure. Effective dose was 16-22% lower when arms were raised. An individual placement algorithm may lead to a relevant reduction of radiation exposure of severely injured patients.
Authors: S Gordic; H Alkadhi; S Hodel; H-P Simmen; M Brueesch; T Frauenfelder; G Wanner; K Sprengel Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-01-16 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Claudia Frellesen; Wenzel Stock; J Matthias Kerl; Thomas Lehnert; Julian L Wichmann; Christoph Nau; Emanuel Geiger; Sebastian Wutzler; Martin Beeres; Boris Schulz; Boris Bodelle; Hanns Ackermann; Thomas J Vogl; Ralf W Bauer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Fabian G Mueck; Sebastian Roesch; Lucas Geyer; Michael Scherr; Michael Seidenbusch; Robert Stahl; Zsuzsanna Deak; Stefan Wirth Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: F Münn; R A Laun; A Asmus; R Bülow; S Bakir; L Haralambiev; A Eisenschenk; S Kim Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Stefan Huber-Wagner; Peter Biberthaler; Sandra Häberle; Matthias Wierer; Martin Dobritz; Ernst Rummeny; Martijn van Griensven; Karl-Georg Kanz; Rolf Lefering Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-07-24 Impact factor: 3.240