CARDIAC CT ANGIOGRAPHY CARDIAC CT ANGIOGRAPHY RADIATION DOSE: HOW LOW RADIATION DOSE: HOW LOW CAN WE GO? CAN WE GO? NEW YORK LANGONE UNIVERSITY JILL E. JACOBS, M.D., FACR JILL E. JACOBS, M.D., FACR Professor of Radiology Department Of Radiology NYU Langone Medical Center USA MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE: NCRP • 1982: per capita dose 0.54 mSv; collective dose 124,000 1982: per capita dose 0.54 mSv; collective dose 124,000 person person-Sv Sv • 2006: per capita dose 3.0 mSv (600% ); collective dose 2006: per capita dose 3.0 mSv (600% ); collective dose 900,000 person 900,000 person-Sv (700% ) Sv (700% ) Mettler, et al. Health Phy 2008; 95 (5): 502-507 = background radiation = background radiation USA MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE • largest dose contributions are from CT & nuclear largest dose contributions are from CT & nuclear med studies (75% of collective effective dose) med studies (75% of collective effective dose) Mettler, et al. Health Phy 2008; 95 (5): 502-507 USA MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE Mettler, et al. Health Phy 2008; 95 (5): 502-507 CT SCANNER AND MANUFACTURER TECHNOLOGY 4-row MDCT 16-row MDCT 64-row MDCT 32-row MDCT + z-FFS DSCT 64-rows high definition MDCT 128-rows + z-FFS MDCT 320-rows MDCT 64-rows + z-FFS DSCT 1 st generation 1998 2 nd generation 2000-02 3 rd generation 2004-05 4 th generation 2006-08 Adapted from: Earls, et al. Radiol Clin N Am 2010; 48: 657-674 TO ACHIEVE OPTIMIZED MOTION-FREE IMAGING OF THE HEART AND CORONARY VESSELS FOLLOWING THE “ALARA” PRINCIPLE USING AS LOW A DOSE AS USING AS LOW A DOSE AS REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE WHILE REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE WHILE MAINTAINING DIAGNOSTIC IMAGE MAINTAINING DIAGNOSTIC IMAGE QUALITY QUALITY
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
CARDIAC CT ANGIOGRAPHY CARDIAC CT ANGIOGRAPHY
RADIATION DOSE: HOW LOW RADIATION DOSE: HOW LOW
CAN WE GO?CAN WE GO?
NEW YORK LANGONE UNIVERSITY
JILL E. JACOBS, M.D., FACRJILL E. JACOBS, M.D., FACRProfessor of RadiologyDepartment Of RadiologyNYU Langone Medical Center
USA MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE: NCRP
•• 1982: per capita dose 0.54 mSv; collective dose 124,000 1982: per capita dose 0.54 mSv; collective dose 124,000 personperson--SvSv
•• largest dose contributions are from CT & nuclear largest dose contributions are from CT & nuclear med studies (75% of collective effective dose)med studies (75% of collective effective dose)
Mettler, et al. Health Phy 2008; 95 (5): 502-507
USA MEDICAL RADIATION EXPOSURE
Mettler, et al. Health Phy 2008; 95 (5): 502-507
CT SCANNER AND MANUFACTURER TECHNOLOGY
4-row MDCT 16-row MDCT
64-row MDCT
32-row MDCT + z-FFS DSCT
64-rows high definition MDCT
128-rows + z-FFS MDCT
320-rows MDCT
64-rows + z-FFS DSCT
1st generation
1998
2nd generation
2000-02
3rd generation
2004-05
4th generation
2006-08
Adapted from: Earls, et al. Radiol Clin N Am 2010; 48: 657-674
TO ACHIEVE OPTIMIZED MOTION-FREE IMAGING OF THE
HEART AND CORONARY VESSELS FOLLOWING THE “ALARA”
PRINCIPLE
USING AS LOW A DOSE AS USING AS LOW A DOSE AS REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE WHILE REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE WHILE MAINTAINING DIAGNOSTIC IMAGE MAINTAINING DIAGNOSTIC IMAGE
RADIATION DOSE IS PROPORTIONAL TO TUBE CURRENT, EXPOSURE TIME, AND THE SQUARE OF TUBE VOLTAGE
AND IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO PITCH
TUBE CURRENT
•• Radiation dose is Radiation dose is proportionalproportional to tube current to tube current
•• reflects the number of electrons flowing from the reflects the number of electrons flowing from the negative to the positive electrode in an Xnegative to the positive electrode in an X--ray tuberay tube
•• expressed in expressed in milliamperesmilliamperes ((mAmA) )
•• increasing the Xincreasing the X--ray tube current increases the ray tube current increases the number of electrons striking the target, resulting in a number of electrons striking the target, resulting in a higher Xhigher X--ray flux (the number of electrons produced ray flux (the number of electrons produced per unit time).per unit time).
•• resultant increase in photon penetration and resultant increase in photon penetration and patient dosepatient dose
TUBE VOLTAGE
•• Radiation dose is Radiation dose is proportionalproportional to the square of the to the square of the tube voltage tube voltage
•• increasing peak Xincreasing peak X--ray tube voltage increases the ray tube voltage increases the number and energy of Xnumber and energy of X--rays produced rays produced
•• resulting in increased Xresulting in increased X--ray penetration and ray penetration and di tidi tiradiation exposureradiation exposure
•• in addition to decreasing radiation dose, lowering the in addition to decreasing radiation dose, lowering the tube voltage results in decreased Compton scattering tube voltage results in decreased Compton scattering and increased photoelectric effect which increases and increased photoelectric effect which increases vascular vascular opacificationopacification
SCAN LENGTH
•• Radiation dose is Radiation dose is proportionalproportional to proscribed scan to proscribed scan length length
•• the longer the scan length, the higher the patient dosethe longer the scan length, the higher the patient dose
PITCH
•• Radiation dose is Radiation dose is inversely proportional inversely proportional to pitch to pitch
•• for a spiral scan, pitch is the longitudinal distance in for a spiral scan, pitch is the longitudinal distance in mm that the table travels during one rotation of the Xmm that the table travels during one rotation of the X--ray tube divided by the collimation of the xray tube divided by the collimation of the x--ray beam ray beam
•• decreasing the pitch results in increased overlap decreasing the pitch results in increased overlap b t d t i itib t d t i itibetween data acquisitionsbetween data acquisitions
•• increases scan time and Xincreases scan time and X--ray exposureray exposure
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF CHANGING EACH PARAMETER??
•• Decreasing tube current Decreasing tube current •• decreases dose but increases image noisedecreases dose but increases image noise
•• Decreasing voltageDecreasing voltage•• decreases dose but increases image noisedecreases dose but increases image noise
•• Faster gantry rotation time Faster gantry rotation time •• improves temporal resolution but increases image noiseimproves temporal resolution but increases image noise
•• Decreasing zDecreasing z--collimated detector slice widthcollimated detector slice widthii i ti l l ti b t i i ii ti l l ti b t i i i•• improves zimproves z--axis spatial resolution but increases image noiseaxis spatial resolution but increases image noise
•• Increasing ZIncreasing Z--axis coverage per rotationaxis coverage per rotation•• decreases scan time & # heartbeats but potentially increases decreases scan time & # heartbeats but potentially increases
exposure of tissue outside the desired imaging range (zexposure of tissue outside the desired imaging range (z--overscanningoverscanning))
•• averages radiation dose over the x, y, & z directions averages radiation dose over the x, y, & z directions & expresses the average dose to the scan volume & expresses the average dose to the scan volume for a CT examfor a CT exam
•• Dose length product (DLP) in Dose length product (DLP) in mGymGy x cm x cm
•• == CTDICTDI times scan lengthtimes scan length•• = = CTDICTDIvolvol times scan length times scan length
•• indicates integrated radiation dose for the scanindicates integrated radiation dose for the scan
•• Effective dose (E) in Effective dose (E) in mSvmSv
•• reflects the varying reflects the varying radiosensitivityradiosensitivity of the tissues of the tissues within the acquisitionwithin the acquisition
•• = DLP x chest conversion coefficient (k) where k= = DLP x chest conversion coefficient (k) where k= 0.014 0.014 mSvmSv mGymGy --11cm cm --11
BASIC PILLARS OF DOSE REDUCTION
Dose Reduction Technology
AppropriateUtilization TechnologyUtilization
APPROPRIATE UTILIZATION
•• Confirm the test is indicatedConfirm the test is indicated
•• does it follow appropriateness guidelinesdoes it follow appropriateness guidelines
•• is there an appropriate risk/benefit ratiois there an appropriate risk/benefit ratio
•• will it change patient managementwill it change patient management
•• are there other tests that can give the sameare there other tests that can give the same•• are there other tests that can give the same are there other tests that can give the same info with less or no radiation (ie MRI)info with less or no radiation (ie MRI)
APPROPRIATE PATIENT SELECTION & PREPARATION
•• is the patient able to cooperate & tolerate the is the patient able to cooperate & tolerate the scanscan
•• is the patient body is the patient body habitushabitus appropriate for the appropriate for the scan and chosen protocolscan and chosen protocol
•• is there an appropriate heart rate/rhythm for is there an appropriate heart rate/rhythm for scanner and protocol scanner and protocol
•• adjust type of EKG synchronizationadjust type of EKG synchronization
•• change type of reconstructionchange type of reconstruction
PROTOCOL MODIFICATION FOR DOSE REDUCTION
•• series adjustment (? clinical question)series adjustment (? clinical question)
Coronary CTA
Calcium Scoring
•• Prospective gating with 320Prospective gating with 320--MDCTMDCT
6.5 mSV
4.33 mSV
SCAN LENGTH ADJUSTMENT
* Khan, et al. AJR 2011; 196: 407-11
3.47 mSV
EKG SYNCHRONIZATION
•• Retrospective gatingRetrospective gating
•• Prospective triggeringProspective triggering
RETROSPECTIVE ECG GATING•• ADVANTAGES:ADVANTAGES:
•• spiral mode: volumetric data acquired thru whole cardiac cyclespiral mode: volumetric data acquired thru whole cardiac cycle
•• data from specific parts of cardiac cycle retrospectively data from specific parts of cardiac cycle retrospectively referenced to ECG signal for image reconreferenced to ECG signal for image recon
•• can perform LV functional analysis and 4D evaluationcan perform LV functional analysis and 4D evaluation
•• less dependent on regular heart rhythm (capability to edit)less dependent on regular heart rhythm (capability to edit)
•• vulnerable to cardiac motion artifacts with high orvulnerable to cardiac motion artifacts with high or irregirreg HRsHRsvulnerable to cardiac motion artifacts with high or vulnerable to cardiac motion artifacts with high or irregirreg HRsHRs
-- beta blockbeta block
•• not possible to perform accurate LV functional analysisnot possible to perform accurate LV functional analysis
Shuman, et al. Radiology 2008;248:431
PROSPECTIVE GATING: 5 mSv
LAD RCA
PADDING
SSCT min current duration ≈
½ rotation time + fan <
LaBounty, et al. AJR 2010; 194: 933-37
45% increase in radiation dose for
every 100-millisecond increase in
padding Earls, et al. Radiology 2008; 246: 742-53
Bischoff, et al. AJR 2010; 194: 1495-1499
How does this translate into cancer risk??
Huda, et al. AJR 2011; 196: W159-165
RISK IS GREATER WITH YOUNGER AGE!!
Huda, et al. AJR 2011; 196: W159-165
How does this translate into cancer risk??
PROSPECTIVELY ECG-TRIGGERED HIGH-PITCH SPIRAL WITH DSCT
25 ptsMean eff dose
1.0 mSv
Lell, et al. Eur Radio 2009; 19: 2576
HIGH PITCH SPIRAL DSCT
•• HR slow and regular (<60 BPM)HR slow and regular (<60 BPM)
•• NonNon--obese patientsobese patients
1 mSv
TUBE CURRENT ADJUSTMENT
PROTOCOL study:PROTOCOL study:every 100every 100--mA tube current reduction mA tube current reduction was associated with a 20% reductionwas associated with a 20% reduction
LaBounty, et al. Circulation 2009; 120: S334
was associated with a 20% reduction was associated with a 20% reduction in radiation dosein radiation dose
•• Assumes initial attenuation coefficients for all Assumes initial attenuation coefficients for all voxelsvoxels
and uses these coefficients to predict projection dataand uses these coefficients to predict projection data
•• predicted projection data are compared to actual predicted projection data are compared to actual projection data and projection data and voxelvoxel attenuations are modified attenuations are modified until the error between estimated and measured until the error between estimated and measured projection data is acceptableprojection data is acceptable
•• IR algorithms reduce image noiseIR algorithms reduce image noise
•• thereby allowing tube current reductionthereby allowing tube current reduction
•• Produce equivalent signalProduce equivalent signal--toto--noise ratios at lower noise ratios at lower
radiation doses without loss of spatial resolutionradiation doses without loss of spatial resolution
•• Require more time for image reconstruction than FBPRequire more time for image reconstruction than FBP
Leipsic, et al. AJR 2010; 195: 655-60
FBP IR
σ = 20.7 σ = 14.8* Image noise = standard deviation of CT density in ROI
FBP IR FBP IR
COMBINE DOSE REDUCTION TECHNIQUES WHEN APPROPRIATE
JAMA 2009; 301 (22): 2340-8
100 kV; PROSPECTIVE TRIGGERING: 2 mSv
80 kV; High Pitch Spiral DSCT: 0.7 mSv
62 yo man with chest pain; BMI 21 67 yo woman with chest pain; BMI 23; mean HR 61 BPM
80 kV; High Pitch Spiral DSCT: 0.4 mSv
80 kV; High Pitch Spiral DSCT: 0.2 mSv14 yo boy with syncope after exercise; BMI 19
IN CONCLUSION…..
WHEN CONSIDERING DOSE REDUCTION WE SHOULD BEAR
IN MIND THE WORDS OF LEONARDO Da VINCI
“I have been impressed with the urgency of doing. Knowing is not enough; we must apply.