James V Spearman1, U Joseph Schoepf1, Marietta Rottenkolber1, Ivo Driesser1, Christian Canstein1, Kolja M Thierfelder1, Aleksander W Krazinski1, Carlo N De Cecco1, Felix G Meinel1. 1. From the Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science (J.V.S., U.J.S., A.W.K., C.N.D.C., F.G.M.) and Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine (U.J.S.), Medical University of South Carolina, 25 Courtenay Dr, MSC 226, Charleston, SC 29425; Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik IV, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany (M.R.); Healthcare Division, Computed Tomography, Siemens, Forchheim, Germany (I.D.); Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Malvern, Pa (C.C.); Institute for Clinical Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Hospital, Munich, Germany (K.M.T., F.G.M.); and Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome "Sapienza"-Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy (C.N.D.C.).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on radiation dose at computed tomography (CT) worldwide encompassing all body regions and types of CT examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: No patient information was accessed; therefore, institutional review board approval was not sought. Data from 86 centers across the world were analyzed. All CT interactions were automatically collected and transmitted to the CT vendor during two 6-week periods immediately before and 2 weeks after implementation of ATVS. A total of 164 323 unique CT studies were analyzed. Studies were categorized by body region and type of examination. Tube voltage and volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) were compared between examinations performed with ATVS and those performed before ATVS implementation. Descriptive statistical methods and multilevel linear regression models were used for analysis. RESULTS: Across all types of CT examinations and body regions, CTDIvol was 14.7% lower in examinations performed with ATVS (n = 30 313) than in those performed before ATVS implementation (n = 79 275). Relative reductions in mean CTDIvol were most notable for temporal bone CT (-56.1%), peripheral runoff CT angiography (-48.6%), CT of the paranasal sinus (-39.6%), cerebral or carotid CT angiography (-36.4%), coronary CT angiography (-25.1%), and head CT (-23.9%). An increase in mean CTDIvol was observed for renal stone protocols (26.2%) and thoracic or lumbar spine examinations (6.6%). In the multilevel model with fixed effects ATVS and examination type, and the interaction of these variables and the random effect country, a significant influence on CTDIvol for all fixed efects was revealed (ATVS, P = .0031; examination type, P < .0001; interaction term, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: ATVS significantly reduces radiation dose across most, but not all, body regions and types of CT examinations.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on radiation dose at computed tomography (CT) worldwide encompassing all body regions and types of CT examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: No patient information was accessed; therefore, institutional review board approval was not sought. Data from 86 centers across the world were analyzed. All CT interactions were automatically collected and transmitted to the CT vendor during two 6-week periods immediately before and 2 weeks after implementation of ATVS. A total of 164 323 unique CT studies were analyzed. Studies were categorized by body region and type of examination. Tube voltage and volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) were compared between examinations performed with ATVS and those performed before ATVS implementation. Descriptive statistical methods and multilevel linear regression models were used for analysis. RESULTS: Across all types of CT examinations and body regions, CTDIvol was 14.7% lower in examinations performed with ATVS (n = 30 313) than in those performed before ATVS implementation (n = 79 275). Relative reductions in mean CTDIvol were most notable for temporal bone CT (-56.1%), peripheral runoff CT angiography (-48.6%), CT of the paranasal sinus (-39.6%), cerebral or carotid CT angiography (-36.4%), coronary CT angiography (-25.1%), and head CT (-23.9%). An increase in mean CTDIvol was observed for renal stone protocols (26.2%) and thoracic or lumbar spine examinations (6.6%). In the multilevel model with fixed effects ATVS and examination type, and the interaction of these variables and the random effect country, a significant influence on CTDIvol for all fixed efects was revealed (ATVS, P = .0031; examination type, P < .0001; interaction term, P < .0001). CONCLUSION:ATVS significantly reduces radiation dose across most, but not all, body regions and types of CT examinations.
Authors: Stefanie Mangold; Julian L Wichmann; U Joseph Schoepf; Zachary B Poole; Christian Canstein; Akos Varga-Szemes; Damiano Caruso; Fabian Bamberg; Konstantin Nikolaou; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Moritz H Albrecht; John W Nance; U Joseph Schoepf; Brian E Jacobs; Richard R Bayer; Sheldon E Litwin; Michael A Reynolds; Katharina Otani; Stefanie Mangold; Akos Varga-Szemes; Domenico De Santis; Marwen Eid; Georg Apfaltrer; Christian Tesche; Markus Goeller; Thomas J Vogl; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: A Eller; M Wiesmüller; W Wüst; R Heiss; M Kopp; M Saake; M Brand; M Uder; M M May Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Robert Forbrig; Lucas L Geyer; Robert Stahl; Jun Thorsteinsdottir; Christian Schichor; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Maximilian Patzig; Moriz Herzberg; Thomas Liebig; Franziska Dorn; Christoph G Trumm Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Rahul D Renapurkar; Andrew Primak; Joseph Azok; Jason Lempel; Yasmeen Tandon; Jennifer Bullen; Frank Dong; Wadih Karim; Ruffin Graham Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Stefanie Mangold; Julian L Wichmann; U Joseph Schoepf; Damiano Caruso; Christian Tesche; Daniel H Steinberg; Akos Varga-Szemes; Andrew C Stubenrauch; Richard R Bayer; Matthew Biancalana; Konstantin Nikolaou; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Bastian O Sabel; Kristijan Buric; Nora Karara; Kolja M Thierfelder; Julien Dinkel; Wieland H Sommer; Felix G Meinel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hong Seon Lee; Young Joo Suh; Kyunghwa Han; Jin Young Kim; Suyon Chang; Dong Jin Im; Yoo Jin Hong; Hye-Jeong Lee; Jin Hur; Young Jin Kim; Byoung Wook Choi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.240