Radiation exposure related to cardiovascular CT examination: comparison between conventional 64-MDCT and third-generation dual-source MDCTAbstractPurposeTo compare radiation exposure associated with daily practice cardiovascular (CV) examinations performed on two different multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners, a conventional 64-MDCT and a third-generation dual-source (DS) MDCT. Materials and methodsIn this retrospective study, 1458 patients who underwent CV examinations between January 2017 and August 2018 were enrolled. A single-source 64-MDCT (Lightspeed VCT, GE) scan was performed in 705 patients from January to August 2017 (207 coronary examinations and 498 vascular examinations) and 753 patients underwent third-generation 192 × 2-DSCT (Somatom FORCE, Siemens) scan from January to August 2018 (302 coronary examinations and 451 vascular examinations). Volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), dose length product (DLP), effective dose (ED), tube voltage (TV) and exposure time (ET), pitch factor (PF) were registered for each patient. Student's t test was used to compare mean values between each corresponding group of MDCT and DSCT. ResultsIn coronary examinations with DSCT, CTDIvol was 24.4% lower (23.1 mGy vs 30.6 mGy, p < 0.0001) and DLP and ED reductions were 35.6% than with MDCT (465.0 mGy * cm vs 732.3 mGy * cm and 6.5 mSv and 10.3 mSv; vs p < 0.0001). Concerning scan parameters, kVp and ET reductions were 12.7% and 69.4%, respectively (p < 0.0001); PF increase was 73.8% (p < 0.0001). In all vascular studies, DSCT, compared with MDCT, permitted to reduce CTDIvol from 43.5 to 70.6%; DLP and ED reductions were from 50.3 to 73.1%; kVp and ET decreases were from 10.7 to 32.5% and from 26.3 to 68.7%. PF increase was from 16.7 to 58.1% (all differences with p < 0.0001). ConclusionsIn daily practice, CV examinations CTDI, DLP, ED, ET and TV were lower and PF was higher with 192 × 2-DSCT compared to 64-MDCT. |
Subspecialization in radiology: effects on the diagnostic spectrum of radiologists and report turnaround time in a Swiss university hospitalAbstractPurposeTo analyze the changes in the work profiles of radiologists and the reporting time after the implementation of professional subspecialization in the radiology department of a Swiss university hospital. MethodsIn a retrospective analysis, the overall number of different radiologic examinations performed in the department of radiology of the largest Swiss university hospital was documented for 2014 and 2016 before and after the implementation of subspecialized reporting (subspecialities: abdominal, musculoskeletal, cardiothoracic, emergency, and pediatric imaging) in May 2015. For six selected radiologists, the number and types of reported examinations as well as the related radiology report turnaround times (RTATs) were analyzed in detail and compared between the two 1-year periods. ResultsOverall, there was a significant increase of 10.3% in the total number of examinations performed in the whole department in 2016 compared with 2014. For four of the six radiologists, the range of different types of examinations significantly decreased with the introduction of subspecialized reporting (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there was a significant change in the subset of the ten most commonly reported types of examinations reported by each of the six radiologists. Mean overall RTATs significantly increased for five of the six radiologists (p < 0.05). ConclusionsImplementation of subspecialized reporting led to a change in the structure and a decrease in the range of different examination types reported by each radiologist. Mean RTAT increased for most radiologists. Subspecialized reporting allows the individual radiologist to focus on a special field of professional competence but can result in longer overall RTAT. |
Trends in radiation dose and image quality for pediatric patients with a multidetector CT and a third-generation dual-source dual-energy CTAbstractAimTo provide an overview on dose reduction and image quality after the installation of a third-generation dual-source CT (dsCT) in a Pediatric Radiology Department. Materials and methodsWe included pediatric patients (< 20 years old) undergoing CT for oncological staging (neck, chest and abdomen) or low-dose chest CT for lung diseases. Each of these two groups were further divided in two age groups (≤ or > 10 years old) including patients scanned in the same period of two consecutive years, in 2017 with a 16-row LightSpeed CT (GE Healthcare) or in 2018 with a Somatom Force dsCT (Siemens Healthineers). Technical parameters such as kVp, mAs, slice thickness, exposure times and dose indicators were retrieved and compared. Image quality was evaluated in consensus by two radiologists on a five-point semiquantitative scale. Nonparametric tests were used. ResultsIn oncological patients, significantly lower kVp and tube current with better image quality were achieved with the dsCT. Radiation dose (total DLP) was 5–6 times lower with dsCT, thanks also to virtual non-contrast images. In low-dose chest CT, the frequent use of tin filter required higher tube current; a total DLP 3 times lower was achieved with dsCT in patients ≤ 10 years old. The image quality was better with the dsCT in low-dose chest CT protocols. ConclusionThe third-generation dsCT provides high-quality images with reduced motion artifacts at lower dose. |
Medical radiological procedures: which information would be chosen for the report?AbstractAims and objectivesThe aim of this study was to properly define the information regarding patient exposure to Ionizing Radiations in the radiological report, according to the European Directive 2013/59/EURATOM (EU 2013/59 art.58(b)). For this purpose, we evaluated the results from other Member States EU 2013/59 transpositions and from Guidelines recommendation published by International Organizations involved in diagnostic radiology. A practical way for implementing art.58 is also traced. Materials and methodsDosimetric quantities, such as exposure, absorbed dose and effective dose which may be included in radiological report, were first analyzed; then, in order to define international state of art of Member States EU 2013/59 transposition, a Web research using French, English, Spanish and German key words was performed. ResultsEU 2013/59 transposition for 5 Member States was reported. Especially regarding art.58, a European project reports that few European countries (11 of 28) have identified the dose metrics to be used in radiological report. Scientific organizations supporting clinical radiologists and medical physicists have published Guidelines reporting parameters useful to quantify the radiation output and to assess patient dose. ConclusionsOur research revealed that there is not a shared interpretation of patient exposure information to be included in radiological report. Nevertheless, according to scientific community, authors believe that the exposure is the most appropriate information that could be included in radiological report. Alternatively, but with more expensiveness, a risk index based on effective dose could be used. Moreover, the systematic exposure information recorded could be useful for dose estimates of population from medical exposure. |
Extra-pleural pneumonectomy in the era of image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapyAbstractPurposeTo assess the outcome of malignant pleural mesothelioma patients treated with extra-pleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), using the most advanced radiotherapeutic techniques, namely image-guided intensity-modulated RT (IG-IMRT). Methods and materialsFifty-four patients were analyzed. Minimum radiation dose was 50 Gy (2 Gy/fr). Planning target volume encompassed the entire hemithorax, including the ipsilateral mediastinum if interested by disease, the pericardium and diaphragm, and any drain sites. The study endpoints included loco-regional control (LRC), distant metastases free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS), as well as radiation-related toxicity. ResultsMajor patients and treatment characteristics were the following: median age 62 years, epithelioid histology in 51 (94%) cases, locally advanced disease in 41 (90%) cases, and metastatic mediastinal lymph nodes in 27 patients (50%). Only 7 patients (13%) had gross residual disease after surgery. Chemotherapy was administered in 38 patients (70%). Median follow-up was 16 months (range 0–73 months). Median and 2-year OS were 21 months and was 43.8%, respectively. The predominant pattern of failure was distant: 34 patients (62.9%) developed some component of distant failure, and only 5 patients (9.2%) developed an isolated loco-regional recurrence. The estimates of LRC and DMFS at 2 years were 63.4% and 43.4%, respectively. Three fatal pneumonitis were documented. Other major toxicities included: Grade 2 and 3 pneumonitis in 1 and 2 cases, respectively, 1 case of bronchial fistula, pleural empyema, and Grade 3 esophagitis, respectively. ConclusionsAlthough executed in the era of high-technology radiotherapy (IG-IMRT), EPP should not be routinely performed. |
Practical recommendations for the application of DE 59/2013AbstractThe changes introduced with Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom will require European Member States adapt their regulations, procedures and equipment to the new high standards of radiation safety. These new requirements will have an impact, in particular, on the radiology community (including medical physics experts) and on industry. Relevant changes include new definitions, a new dose limit for the eye lens, non-medical imaging exposures, procedures in asymptomatic individuals, the use and regular review of diagnostic reference levels (including interventional procedures), dosimetric information in imaging systems and its transfer to the examination report, new requirements on responsibilities, the registry and analysis of accidental or unintended exposure and population dose evaluation (based on age and gender distribution). Furthermore, the Directive emphasises the need for justification of medical exposure (including asymptomatic individuals), introduces requirements concerning patient information and strengthens those for recording and reporting doses from radiological procedures, the use of diagnostic reference levels, the availability of dose-indicating devices and the improved role and support of the medical physics experts in imaging. |
Protecting sensitive patient groups from imaging using ionizing radiation: effects during pregnancy, in fetal life and childhoodAbstractThe frequency of imaging examinations requiring radiation exposure in children (especially CT) is rapidly increasing. This paper reviews the current evidence in radiation protection in pediatric imaging, focusing on the recent knowledge of the biological risk related to low doses exposure. Even if there are no strictly defined limits for patient radiation exposure, it is recommended to try to keep doses as low as reasonably achievable (the ALARA principle). To achieve ALARA, several techniques to reduce the radiation dose in radiation-sensitive patients groups are reviewed. The most recent recommendations that provide guidance regarding imaging of pregnant women are also summarized, and the risk depending on dose and phase of pregnancy is reported. Finally, the risk-benefit analysis of each examination, and careful communication of this risk to the patient, is emphasized. |
Dematerialisation of patient's informed consent in radiology: insights on current status and radiologists' opinion from an Italian online surveyAbstractPurposeTo assess the current status of patient's informed consent (PIC) management at radiological centres and the overall opinion of radiologist active members of the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) about PIC dematerialisation through an online survey. Methods and materialsAll members were invited to join the survey as an initiative by the Imaging Informatics Chapter of SIRM. The survey consisted of 11 multiple-choice questions about participants' demographics, current local modalities of PIC acquisition and storage, perceived advantages and disadvantages of PIC dematerialisation over conventional paper-based PIC, and overall opinion about PIC dematerialisation. ResultsA total of 1791 radiologists (amounting to 17.4% of active SIRM members for the year 2016) joined the survey. Perceived advantages of PIC dematerialisation were easier and faster PIC recovery (96.5%), safer storage and conservation (94.5%), and reduced costs (90.7%). Conversely, the need to create dedicated areas for PIC acquisition inside each radiological unit (64.0%) and to gain preliminary approval for the use of advanced digital signature tools from patients (51.8%) were seen as potential disadvantages. Overall, 94.5% of respondents had a positive opinion about PIC dematerialisation. ConclusionRadiologists were mostly favourable to PIC dematerialisation. However, concerns were raised that its practical implementation might face hurdles due to its complexity in current real life working conditions. |
Artificial intelligence: a challenge for third millennium radiologist |
Soft tissue sarcomas in the precision medicine era: new advances in clinical practice and future perspectivesAbstractSoft tissue sarcomas (STSs) represent a rare and heterogeneous group of solid tumours derived from mesenchymal progenitors and account for 1% of all adult malignancies. Although in the last decade anthracycline-based chemotherapy single agent or in combinations has been able to improve clinical benefits, prognosis is still poor and STSs represent an important unmet medical need. Continuous advances in cancer genetics and genomics have contributed to change management paradigms of STSs as it occurred for other solid tumours. Several treatments have been recently developed with the specific aim of targeting different cell pathways and immune-checkpoints that have been recognized to drive tumour progression. The following attempts to provide a review of literature focusing on the available data concerning novel treatments and future prospective for the management of metastatic STSs. |
Δευτέρα 22 Απριλίου 2019
La radiologia medica
Αναρτήθηκε από
Alexandros G. Sfakianakis,Anapafseos 5 Agios Nikolaos 72100 Crete Greece,00306932607174,00302841026182
στις
11:01 μ.μ.
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια ανάρτησης (Atom)
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου