Individual Calculation of Effective Dose and Risk of Malignancy Based on Monte Carlo Simulations after Whole Body Computed Tomography.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 06 2020
11 06 2020
Historique:
received:
21
01
2019
accepted:
14
05
2020
entrez:
13
6
2020
pubmed:
13
6
2020
medline:
1
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Detailed knowledge about radiation exposure is crucial for radiology professionals. The conventional calculation of effective dose (ED) for computed tomography (CT) is based on dose length product (DLP) and population-based conversion factors (k). This is often imprecise and unable to consider individual patient characteristics. We sought to provide more precise and individual radiation exposure calculation using image based Monte Carlo simulations (MC) in a heterogeneous patient collective and to compare it to phantom based MC provided from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) as academic reference. Dose distributions were simulated for 22 patients after whole-body CT during Positron Emission Tomography-CT. Based on MC we calculated individual Lifetime Attributable Risk (LAR) and Excess Relative Risk (ERR) of cancer mortality. ED
Identifiants
pubmed: 32528028
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66366-2
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-66366-2
pmc: PMC7289876
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9475Références
EC. COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2013/59/EURATOM of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, a. r. D.
Laurier, D. et al. The International Nuclear Workers Study (Inworks): A Collaborative Epidemiological Study to Improve Knowledge About Health Effects of Protracted Low-Dose Exposure. Radiation protection dosimetry https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncw314 (2016).
doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncw314
Huda, W. & Mettler, F. A. Volume CT dose index and dose-length product displayed during CT: what good are they? Radiology 258, 236–242, https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100297 (2011).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100297
pubmed: 20971777
Blackwell, C. R. & McCullough, E. C. A chamber and electrometer calibration factor as determined by each of the five AAPM accredited dosimetry calibration laboratories. Medical physics 19, 207–208, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596880 (1992).
doi: 10.1118/1.596880
pubmed: 1620050
Hill, K. D. et al. Radiation Safety in Children With Congenital and Acquired Heart Disease: A Scientific Position Statement on Multimodality Dose Optimization From the Image Gently Alliance. JACC. Cardiovascular imaging 10, 797–818, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.04.003 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.04.003
pubmed: 28514670
pmcid: 5542588
AAPM. The Measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT,. AAPM Report No. 96 (2008).
Lee, C., Kim, K. P., Bolch, W. E., Moroz, B. E. & Folio, L. NCICT: a computational solution to estimate organ doses for pediatric and adult patients undergoing CT scans. Journal of radiological protection: official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection 35, 891–909, https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/35/4/891 (2015).
doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/35/4/891
Martin, C. J. Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures? The British journal of radiology 80, 639–647, https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/25922439 (2007).
doi: 10.1259/bjr/25922439
pubmed: 17646189
McCollough, C. H., Christner, J. A. & Kofler, J. M. How effective is effective dose as a predictor of radiation risk? AJR. American journal of roentgenology 194, 890–896, https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.4179 (2010).
doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.4179
pubmed: 20308487
Romanyukha, A., Folio, L., Lamart, S., Simon, S. L. & Lee, C. Body Size-Specific Effective Dose Conversion Coefficients for Ct Scans. Radiation protection dosimetry 172, 428–437, https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncv511 (2016).
doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncv511
pubmed: 26755767
Huda, W. & He, W. Estimating cancer risks to adults undergoing body CT examinations. Radiation protection dosimetry 150, 168–179, https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncr376 (2012).
doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncr376
pubmed: 21926419
Li, X. et al. Patient-specific dose estimation for pediatric chest CT. Medical physics 35, 5821–5828, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3026593 (2008).
doi: 10.1118/1.3026593
pubmed: 19175138
pmcid: 3910243
Kost, S. D. et al. Patient-specific dose calculations for pediatric CT of the chest, abdomen and pelvis. Pediatric radiology 45, 1771–1780, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-015-3400-2 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s00247-015-3400-2
pubmed: 26142256
pmcid: 4623993
In Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiations: Time for Reassessment? (1998).
Kyriakou, Y., Kachelriess, M., Knaup, M., Krause, J. U. & Kalender, W. A. Impact of the z-flying focal spot on resolution and artifact behavior for a 64-slice spiral CT scanner. European radiology 16, 1206–1215, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0118-9 (2006).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-005-0118-9
pubmed: 16541229
Li, X. et al. Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT: part II. Application to patients. Medical physics 38, 408–419, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3515864 (2011).
doi: 10.1118/1.3515864
pubmed: 21361209
McCollough, C. H. et al. CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology 259, 311–316, https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101800 (2011).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.11101800
pubmed: 21502387
pmcid: 3079120
Deak, P., van Straten, M., Shrimpton, P. C., Zankl, M. & Kalender, W. A. Validation of a Monte Carlo tool for patient-specific dose simulations in multi-slice computed tomography. European radiology 18, 759–772, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0815-7 (2008).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-007-0815-7
pubmed: 18066555
DeMarco, J. J. et al. A Monte Carlo based method to estimate radiation dose from multidetector CT (MDCT): cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms. Physics in medicine and biology 50, 3989–4004, https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/50/17/005 (2005).
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/50/17/005
pubmed: 16177525
Jarry, G., DeMarco, J. J., Beifuss, U., Cagnon, C. H. & McNitt-Gray, M. F. A Monte Carlo-based method to estimate radiation dose from spiral CT: from phantom testing to patient-specific models. Physics in medicine and biology 48, 2645–2663 (2003).
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/48/16/306
The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Annals of the ICRP 37, 1–332, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icrp.2007.10.003 (2007).
Rampinelli, C. et al. Exposure to low dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening and risk of cancer: secondary analysis of trial data and risk-benefit analysis. Bmj 356, j347, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j347 (2017).
doi: 10.1136/bmj.j347
pubmed: 28179230
pmcid: 5421449
Lee, W. C. Excess relative risk as an effect measure in case-control studies of rare diseases. PloS one 10, e0121141, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121141 (2014).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121141
pubmed: 25919483
Tian, X. et al. Pediatric chest and abdominopelvic CT: organ dose estimation based on 42 patient models. Radiology 270, 535–547, https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13122617 (2014).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122617
pubmed: 24126364
pmcid: 4228746
Jansen, J. T. & Shrimpton, P. C. Development of Monte Carlo simulations to provide scanner-specific organ dose coefficients for contemporary CT. Physics in medicine and biology 61, 5356–5377, https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/14/5356 (2016).
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/61/14/5356
pubmed: 27362736
Grudzenski, S., Kuefner, M. A., Heckmann, M. B., Uder, M. & Lobrich, M. Contrast medium-enhanced radiation damage caused by CT examinations. Radiology 253, 706–714, https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2533090468 (2009).
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2533090468
pubmed: 19789225
Law, M. et al. Cumulative Effective Dose and Cancer Risk of Pediatric Population in Repetitive Whole-Body Scan Using Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry. Journal of clinical densitometry: the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2017.09.005 (2017).
Kalra, M. K., Sodickson, A. D. & Mayo-Smith, W. W. CT Radiation: Key Concepts for Gentle and Wise Use. Radiographics: a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc 35, 1706–1721, https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015150118 (2015).
doi: 10.1148/rg.2015150118
McBee, M. P. et al. Deep Learning in Radiology. Academic radiology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2018.02.018 (2018).
Lee, H. et al. Pixel-Level Deep Segmentation: Artificial Intelligence Quantifies Muscle on Computed Tomography for Body Morphometric Analysis. Journal of digital imaging 30, 487–498, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-017-9988-z (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s10278-017-9988-z
pubmed: 28653123
pmcid: 5537099
Shore, R. et al. Implications of recent epidemiologic studies for the linear nonthreshold model and radiation protection. Journal of radiological protection: official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection, https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/aad348 (2018).
Kase, K. R. Radiation protection principles of NCRP. Health physics 87, 251–257 (2004).
doi: 10.1097/00004032-200409000-00005