R D Nawfel1,2, G S Young3,4,2. 1. From the Department of Radiology (R.D.N., G.S.Y.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Radiology (R.D.N., G.S.Y.), Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. From the Department of Radiology (R.D.N., G.S.Y.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts gsyoung@partners.org. 4. Department of Radiology (G.S.Y.), Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Estimates of cumulative CT/CTA radiation dose based on volumetric CT dose index have raised concern that neurological intensive care unit patient exposures may reach thresholds for deterministic skin injury. Because the accuracy of volumetric CT dose index for this purpose in unknown, we set out to directly measure head CT and CTA peak skin dose, assess the relationship of volumetric CT dose index to measured peak skin dose, and determine whether multiple CT/CTA exposures in typical patients in the neurological intensive care unit produce cumulative doses approaching or exceeding single-dose deterministic thresholds for skin injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective study from 2011-2013, nanoDot optical stimulated luminescence dosimeters were used to measure head CT/CTA peak skin dose in 52 patients (28 female, 24 male; mean age, 63 years) divided equally between 2 CT scanners. Volumetric CT dose index and dose-length product were recorded for each examination. Peak skin dose was also measured on an acrylic skull phantom in each scanner. A 2-tailed, unpaired t test was used to compare mean patient skin doses between the 2 scanners. The measured peak skin doses were then used to calculate cumulative peak skin dose in 4 typical patients in intensive care units who received multiple CT/CTA scans. RESULTS: Head CT/CTA peak skin dose agreed between scanners in patients and phantoms: (scanner 1 CT/CTA: patients, 39.2 ± 3.7 mGy and 98.9 ± 5.3 mGy, respectively, versus phantom, 40.0 mGy and 105.4 mGy, respectively; scanner 2 CT/CTA: patients, 42.9 ± 9.4 mGy and 98.8 ± 7.4 mGy, respectively, versus phantom, 37.6 mGy and 95.2 mGy, respectively). Volumetric CT dose index overestimated peak skin dose by a factor of 1.4-1.9 depending on examination and CT scanner. Cumulative doses in 4 patients in the intensive care unit estimated from measured CT/CTA peak skin dose ranged from 1.9-4.5 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Directly measured radiation skin doses from head CT/CTA patient examinations are substantially lower than volumetric CT dose index. Measured peak skin dose confirms that multiple head CT/CTA examinations in representative patients in the neurological intensive care unit may produce cumulative doses exceeding the single-dose deterministic threshold for skin injury.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Estimates of cumulative CT/CTA radiation dose based on volumetric CT dose index have raised concern that neurological intensive care unit patient exposures may reach thresholds for deterministic skin injury. Because the accuracy of volumetric CT dose index for this purpose in unknown, we set out to directly measure head CT and CTA peak skin dose, assess the relationship of volumetric CT dose index to measured peak skin dose, and determine whether multiple CT/CTA exposures in typical patients in the neurological intensive care unit produce cumulative doses approaching or exceeding single-dose deterministic thresholds for skin injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective study from 2011-2013, nanoDot optical stimulated luminescence dosimeters were used to measure head CT/CTA peak skin dose in 52 patients (28 female, 24 male; mean age, 63 years) divided equally between 2 CT scanners. Volumetric CT dose index and dose-length product were recorded for each examination. Peak skin dose was also measured on an acrylic skull phantom in each scanner. A 2-tailed, unpaired t test was used to compare mean patient skin doses between the 2 scanners. The measured peak skin doses were then used to calculate cumulative peak skin dose in 4 typical patients in intensive care units who received multiple CT/CTA scans. RESULTS: Head CT/CTA peak skin dose agreed between scanners in patients and phantoms: (scanner 1 CT/CTA: patients, 39.2 ± 3.7 mGy and 98.9 ± 5.3 mGy, respectively, versus phantom, 40.0 mGy and 105.4 mGy, respectively; scanner 2 CT/CTA: patients, 42.9 ± 9.4 mGy and 98.8 ± 7.4 mGy, respectively, versus phantom, 37.6 mGy and 95.2 mGy, respectively). Volumetric CT dose index overestimated peak skin dose by a factor of 1.4-1.9 depending on examination and CT scanner. Cumulative doses in 4 patients in the intensive care unit estimated from measured CT/CTA peak skin dose ranged from 1.9-4.5 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: Directly measured radiation skin doses from head CT/CTA patient examinations are substantially lower than volumetric CT dose index. Measured peak skin dose confirms that multiple head CT/CTA examinations in representative patients in the neurological intensive care unit may produce cumulative doses exceeding the single-dose deterministic threshold for skin injury.
Authors: John A Bauhs; Thomas J Vrieze; Andrew N Primak; Michael R Bruesewitz; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Radiographics Date: 2008 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Di Zhang; Chris H Cagnon; J Pablo Villablanca; Cynthia H McCollough; Dianna D Cody; Maria Zankl; John J Demarco; Michael F McNitt-Gray Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Di Zhang; Chris H Cagnon; J Pablo Villablanca; Cynthia H McCollough; Dianna D Cody; Donna M Stevens; Maria Zankl; John J Demarco; Adam C Turner; Maryam Khatonabadi; Michael F McNitt-Gray Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: S Diekmann; E Siebert; R Juran; M Roll; W Deeg; H-C Bauknecht; F Diekmann; R Klingebiel; G Bohner Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-01-28 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Judith M Wong; Allen L Ho; Ning Lin; Georgios A Zenonos; Christopher B Martel; Kai Frerichs; Rose Du; William B Gormley Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2013-04-26 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Erica C S Camargo; Karen L Furie; Aneesh B Singhal; Luca Roccatagliata; Mary E Cunnane; Elkan F Halpern; Gordon J Harris; Wade S Smith; Ramon G Gonzalez; Walter J Koroshetz; Michael H Lev Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-06-20 Impact factor: 11.105