Literature DB >> 29164365

Organ doses and lifetime attributable risk evaluations for scoliosis examinations of adolescent patients with the EOS imaging system.

Marco Branchini1, Antonella Del Vecchio2, Carmen Rosaria Gigliotti2, Alessandro Loria2, Alberto Zerbi3, Riccardo Calandrino2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The goal of this work is to evaluate organ doses and lifetime attributable risk of cancer incidence and mortality in scoliosis examinations of adolescent patients performed with EOS imaging system, in order to optimize patient dose and protocols.
METHODS: An anthropomorphic phantom of a normal patient, with thermoluminescent dosimeters in correspondence with the main organs at risk, was imaged with both EOS and computed radiography (CR). For each modality, effective dose was calculated from the measured organ doses. Lifetime attributable risk was computed accordingly to the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR VII) and Public Health England (HPA) publications.
RESULTS: Except for testes and eyes, which were excluded from the scan in CR protocol, for all the other organs the doses delivered with CR examination were higher than these delivered by EOS system. The effective dose in EOS examination (0.43 ± 0.04 mSv) is about two times less than the dose in computed radiography with anti-scatter grid examination (0.87 ± 0.09 mSv), and, consequently, also the cancer probability is lower (5.4 vs 9.7 number of any cancers induction cases per 100,000 person examined, for a 20-year-old male patient).
CONCLUSIONS: The EOS system is efficient in limiting patient dose. The shielding of testes and the exclusion of eyes from the scan could allow to further reduce the dose.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EOS system; Lifetime attributable risk; Organ doses; Scoliosis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29164365     DOI: 10.1007/s11547-017-0828-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Med        ISSN: 0033-8362            Impact factor:   3.469


  26 in total

1.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

2.  Low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) in the perioperative workup of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Kasim Abul-Kasim; Angelica Overgaard; Pavel Maly; Acke Ohlin; Mikael Gunnarsson; Pia C Sundgren
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-09-23       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Musculoskeletal imaging in progress: the EOS imaging system.

Authors:  Marc Wybier; Philippe Bossard
Journal:  Joint Bone Spine       Date:  2012-11-22       Impact factor: 4.929

4.  EOS imaging of the human pelvis: reliability, validity, and controlled comparison with radiography.

Authors:  Bernd Bittersohl; Joana Freitas; Daniela Zaps; Matthew R Schmitz; James D Bomar; Abd R Muhamad; Harish S Hosalkar
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Diagnostic imaging of spinal deformities: reducing patients radiation dose with a new slot-scanning X-ray imager.

Authors:  Sylvain Deschênes; Guy Charron; Gilles Beaudoin; Hubert Labelle; Josée Dubois; Marie-Claude Miron; Stefan Parent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The EOS 2D/3D X-ray imaging system: a cost-effectiveness analysis quantifying the health benefits from reduced radiation exposure.

Authors:  Rita Faria; Claire McKenna; Ros Wade; Huiqin Yang; Nerys Woolacott; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  Optimisation of scoliosis examinations in children.

Authors:  Jolanta Hansen; Anne Grethe Jurik; Bente Fiirgaard; Niels Egund
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2003-09-05

8.  Comparison of dose from radiological examination for scoliosis in children among two pediatric hospitals by Monte Carlo simulation.

Authors:  G Gialousis; E N Yiakoumakis; T K Makri; D Papadoupoulou; M Karlatira; P Karaiskos; S Papaodysseas; N Evlogias; P A Dimitriou; E K Georgiou
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.316

9.  Occupational and patient exposure as well as image quality for full spine examinations with the EOS imaging system.

Authors:  J Damet; P Fournier; P Monnin; M Sans-Merce; D Ceroni; T Zand; F R Verdun; S Baechler
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 10.  SOSORT 2012 consensus paper: reducing x-ray exposure in pediatric patients with scoliosis.

Authors:  Patrick Knott; Eden Pappo; Michelle Cameron; Jc Demauroy; Charles Rivard; Tomasz Kotwicki; Fabio Zaina; James Wynne; Luke Stikeleather; Josette Bettany-Saltikov; Theodoros B Grivas; Jacek Durmala; Toru Maruyama; Stefano Negrini; Joseph P O'Brien; Manuel Rigo
Journal:  Scoliosis       Date:  2014-04-25
View more
  4 in total

1.  Dose, image quality and spine modeling assessment of biplanar EOS micro-dose radiographs for the follow-up of in-brace adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.

Authors:  Baptiste Morel; Sonia Moueddeb; Eleonore Blondiaux; Stephen Richard; Manon Bachy; Raphael Vialle; Hubert Ducou Le Pointe
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Are Restrictive Medical Radiation Imaging Campaigns Misguided? It Seems So: A Case Example of the American Chiropractic Association's Adoption of "Choosing Wisely".

Authors:  Paul A Oakley; Deed E Harrison
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  Technical evaluation of a clinical, bi-planar, digital and upright X-ray imaging unit.

Authors:  Charlotte Kelly; Ioannis Delakis
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2021-06-06

4.  Equivalent Dose and Risk of Exposure Induced Cancer Death of Different Organs due to Various Image Techniques of EOS Imaging System.

Authors:  Nima Hamzian; Saeid Afereydoon; Mahdi Ghorbani; Seyed Mohammad Jalil Abrisham; Zahra Roozmand; Sepideh Abdollahi-Dehkordi; Morteza Sepehr Javan; Mohammad Reza Deevband
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2021-06-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.