Harmonisation of imaging dosimetry in clinical practice: practical approaches and guidance from the ESR EuroSafe Imaging initiative.

Medical imaging Occupational exposure Optimisation Patient exposure Radiation dose Regulation

Journal

Insights into imaging
ISSN: 1869-4101
Titre abrégé: Insights Imaging
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101532453

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Mar 2020
Historique:
received: 27 02 2020
accepted: 05 03 2020
entrez: 2 4 2020
pubmed: 2 4 2020
medline: 2 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The European Directive 2013/59/EURATOM requires member states of the European Union to ensure justification and optimisation of the radiological procedures and to include information on patient exposure as part of the report of the examinations. The EuroSafe Imaging campaign of the European Society of Radiology created a working group (WG) on "Dosimetry for imaging in clinical practice" with the aim to help with the dosimetry aspects required by European and national regulations. The primary focus topics were selected and a survey among the experts of the WG, allowed suggesting some initial consensus approaches.For information on patient exposure, it was agreed to include the dosimetric values reported by the imaging modalities (validated by a medical physics expert). It was also suggested to prepare educational material on dosimetric quantities for patients. Individual optimisation was considered a challenge, especially for interventional procedures. In these cases, patient and occupational doses should be part of the global optimisation process and trigger levels should be defined to avoid skin radiation injuries. Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) always need to be considered for comparison with periodic patient dose audits. In the case of accidental or unintended exposures, a report should be produced for the Quality Assurance programme, together with an educational note to avoid the repetition of incidents. Dose registry and management systems should allow fulfilling the regulatory requirements of national and European regulations. In a second step, and after the initial experience with the Directive implementation, a wider survey will be considered.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32232684
doi: 10.1186/s13244-020-00859-6
pii: 10.1186/s13244-020-00859-6
pmc: PMC7105556
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

54

Références

Ann ICRP. 2017 Oct;46(1):1-144
pubmed: 29065694
Insights Imaging. 2019 May 9;10(1):51
pubmed: 31073735
Insights Imaging. 2015 Aug;6(4):411-7
pubmed: 26014053
Ann ICRP. 2000;30(2):7-67
pubmed: 11459599
J Radiol Prot. 2018 Sep;38(3):1077-1088
pubmed: 30019690
Ann ICRP. 2018 Mar;47(2):1-118
pubmed: 29532669

Auteurs

Eliseo Vano (E)

Radiology department (Medical Physics), Complutense University, Madrid, Spain. eliseov@med.ucm.es.

Guy Frija (G)

Paris Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France.

Wolfram Stiller (W)

Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (DIR), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.

Efstathios Efstathopoulos (E)

2nd Department of Radiology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Claudio Granata (C)

IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Genova, Italy.

Reinhard Loose (R)

Institute of Medical Physics, Nürnberg, Germany.

Graciano Paulo (G)

Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra - Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde de Coimbra (ESTeSC), Coimbra, Portugal.

Dean Pekarovic (D)

Institute of Radiology, University Medical Centre, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Johan Sjöberg (J)

Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Stockholm, Sweden.

Lluís Donoso-Bach (L)

Department of Medical Imaging, Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Classifications MeSH