Quantitative Computed Tomography and Response to Pronation in COVID-19 ARDS.

BACKGROUND: The use of prone position (PP) has been widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas it has demonstrated benefits, including improved oxygenation and lung aeration, the factors influencing the response in terms of gas exchange to PP remain unclear. In particular, the association between baseline quantitative computed tomography (CT) scan results and gas exchange response to PP in invasively ventilated subjects with COVID-19 ARDS is unknown. The present study aimed to compare baseline quantitative CT results between subjects responding to PP in terms of oxygenation or CO2 clearance and those who did not. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective observational study including critically ill, invasively ventilated subjects with COVID-19-related ARDS admitted to the ICUs of Niguarda Hospital between March 2020-November 2021. Blood gas samples were collected before and after PP. Subjects in whom the PaO2 /FIO2 increase was ≥ 20 mm Hg after PP were defined as oxygen responders. CO2 responders were defined when the ventilatory ratio (VR) decreased during PP. Automated quantitative CT analyses were performed to obtain tissue mass and density of the lungs. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five subjects were enrolled, of which 116 (93%) were O2 responders and 51 (41%) CO2 responders. No difference in quantitative CT characteristics and oxygen were observed between responders and non-responders (tissue mass 1,532 ± 396 g vs 1,654 ± 304 g, P = .28; density -544 ± 109 HU vs -562 ± 58 HU P = .42). Similar findings were observed when dividing the population according to CO2 response (tissue mass 1,551 ± 412 g vs 1,534 ± 377 g, P = .89; density -545 ± 123 HU vs -546 ± 94 HU, P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: Most subjects with COVID-19-related ARDS improved their oxygenation at the first pronation cycle. The study suggests that baseline quantitative CT scan data were not associated with the response to PP in oxygenation or CO2 in mechanically ventilated subjects with COVID-19-related ARDS.

A multicenter evaluation of a deep learning software (LungQuant) for lung parenchyma characterization in COVID-19 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The role of computed tomography (CT) in the diagnosis and characterization of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia has been widely recognized. We evaluated the performance of a software for quantitative analysis of chest CT, the LungQuant system, by comparing its results with independent visual evaluations by a group of 14 clinical experts. The aim of this work is to evaluate the ability of the automated tool to extract quantitative information from lung CT, relevant for the design of a diagnosis support model. METHODS: LungQuant segments both the lungs and lesions associated with COVID-19 pneumonia (ground-glass opacities and consolidations) and computes derived quantities corresponding to qualitative characteristics used to clinically assess COVID-19 lesions. The comparison was carried out on 120 publicly available CT scans of patients affected by COVID-19 pneumonia. Scans were scored for four qualitative metrics: percentage of lung involvement, type of lesion, and two disease distribution scores. We evaluated the agreement between the LungQuant output and the visual assessments through receiver operating characteristics area under the curve (AUC) analysis and by fitting a nonlinear regression model. RESULTS: Despite the rather large heterogeneity in the qualitative labels assigned by the clinical experts for each metric, we found good agreement on the metrics compared to the LungQuant output. The AUC values obtained for the four qualitative metrics were 0.98, 0.85, 0.90, and 0.81. CONCLUSIONS: Visual clinical evaluation could be complemented and supported by computer-aided quantification, whose values match the average evaluation of several independent clinical experts. KEY POINTS: We conducted a multicenter evaluation of the deep learning-based LungQuant automated software. We translated qualitative assessments into quantifiable metrics to characterize coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia lesions. Comparing the software output to the clinical evaluations, results were satisfactory despite heterogeneity of the clinical evaluations. An automatic quantification tool may contribute to improve the clinical workflow of COVID-19 pneumonia.

Artificial intelligence for differentiating COVID-19 from other viral pneumonias on CT: comparative analysis of different models based on quantitative and radiomic approaches.

BACKGROUND: To develop a pipeline for automatic extraction of quantitative metrics and radiomic features from lung computed tomography (CT) and develop artificial intelligence (AI) models supporting differential diagnosis between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other viral pneumonia (non-COVID-19). METHODS: Chest CT of 1,031 patients (811 for model building; 220 as independent validation set (IVS) with positive swab for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (647 COVID-19) or other respiratory viruses (384 non-COVID-19) were segmented automatically. A Gaussian model, based on the HU histogram distribution describing well-aerated and ill portions, was optimised to calculate quantitative metrics (QM, n = 20) in both lungs (2L) and four geometrical subdivisions (GS) (upper front, lower front, upper dorsal, lower dorsal; n = 80). Radiomic features (RF) of first (RF1, n = 18) and second (RF2, n = 120) order were extracted from 2L using PyRadiomics tool. Extracted metrics were used to develop four multilayer-perceptron classifiers, built with different combinations of QM and RF: Model1 (RF1-2L); Model2 (QM-2L, QM-GS); Model3 (RF1-2L, RF2-2L); Model4 (RF1-2L, QM-2L, GS-2L, RF2-2L). RESULTS: The classifiers showed accuracy from 0.71 to 0.80 and area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUC) from 0.77 to 0.87 in differentiating COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 pneumonia. Best results were associated with Model3 (AUC 0.867 ± 0.008) and Model4 (AUC 0.870 ± 0.011. For the IVS, the AUC values were 0.834 ± 0.008 for Model3 and 0.828 ± 0.011 for Model4. CONCLUSIONS: Four AI-based models for classifying patients as COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia showed good diagnostic performances that could support clinical decisions.

Diagnostic Performance in Differentiating COVID-19 from Other Viral Pneumonias on CT Imaging: Multi-Reader Analysis Compared with an Artificial Intelligence-Based Model.

Growing evidence suggests that artificial intelligence tools could help radiologists in differentiating COVID-19 pneumonia from other types of viral (non-COVID-19) pneumonia. To test this hypothesis, an R-AI classifier capable of discriminating between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 pneumonia was developed using CT chest scans of 1031 patients with positive swab for SARS-CoV-2 (n = 647) and other respiratory viruses (n = 384). The model was trained with 811 CT scans, while 220 CT scans (n = 151 COVID-19; n = 69 non-COVID-19) were used for independent validation. Four readers were enrolled to blindly evaluate the validation dataset using the CO-RADS score. A pandemic-like high suspicion scenario (CO-RADS 3 considered as COVID-19) and a low suspicion scenario (CO-RADS 3 considered as non-COVID-19) were simulated. Inter-reader agreement and performance metrics were calculated for human readers and R-AI classifier. The readers showed good agreement in assigning CO-RADS score (Gwet's AC2 = 0.71, p < 0.001). Considering human performance, accuracy = 78% and accuracy = 74% were obtained in the high and low suspicion scenarios, respectively, while the AI classifier achieved accuracy = 79% in distinguishing COVID-19 from non-COVID-19 pneumonia on the independent validation dataset. The R-AI classifier performance was equivalent or superior to human readers in all comparisons. Therefore, a R-AI classifier may support human readers in the difficult task of distinguishing COVID-19 from other types of viral pneumonia on CT imaging.

Notifications and alerts in patient dose values for computed tomography and fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures.

The terms "notifications" and "alerts" for medical exposures are used by several national and international organisations. Recommendations for CT scanners have been published by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Some interventional radiology societies as well as national authorities have also published dose notifications for fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures. Notifications and alerts may also be useful for optimisation and to avoid unintended and accidental exposures. The main interest in using these values for high-dose procedures (CT and interventional) is to optimise imaging procedures, reducing the probability of stochastic effects and avoiding tissue reactions. Alerts in X-ray systems may be considered before procedures (as in CT), during procedures (in some interventional radiology systems), and after procedures, when the patient radiation dose results are known and processed. This review summarises the different uses of notifications and alerts to help in optimisation for CT and for fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures as well as in the analysis of unintended and accidental medical exposures. The paper also includes cautions in setting the alert values and discusses the benefits of using patient dose management systems for the alerts, their registry and follow-up, and the differences between notifications, alerts, and trigger levels for individual procedures and the terms used for the collective approach, such as diagnostic reference levels. KEY POINTS: • Notifications and alerts on patient dose values for computed tomography (CT) and fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures (FGIP) allow to improve radiation safety and contribute to the avoidance of radiation injuries and unintended and accidental exposures. • Alerts may be established before the imaging procedures (as in CT) or during and after the procedures as for FGIP. • Dose management systems should include notifications and alerts and their registry for the hospital quality programmes.

Statement of the Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM) task group on radiation dose monitoring systems.

The evaluation of radiation burden in vivo is crucial in modern radiology as stated also in the European Directive 2013/59/Euratom-Basic Safety Standard. Although radiation dose monitoring can impact the justification and optimization of radiological procedure, as well as effective patient communication, standardization of radiation monitoring software is far to be achieved. Toward this goal, the Italian Association of Medical Physics (AIFM) published a report describing the state of the art and standard guidelines in radiation dose monitoring system quality assurance. This article reports the AIFM statement about radiation dose monitoring systems (RDMSs) summarizing the different critical points of the systems related to Medical Physicist Expert (MPE) activities before, during, and after their clinical implementation. In particular, the article describes the general aspects of radiation dose data management, radiation dose monitoring systems, data integrity, and data responsibilities. Furthermore, the acceptance tests that need to be implemented and the most relevant dosimetric data for each radiological modalities are reported under the MPE responsibility.

A method for T1 and T2 relaxation times validation and harmonization as a support to MRI mapping.

We present a proof-of-concept study focusing on a method for the intra- and inter-center validation and harmonization of data obtained from MRI T1 and T2 maps. The method is based on a set of MnCl2 samples that provide in-scan ground-truth reference values regardless of the details of the MRI protocol. The relaxation times of MnCl2 aqueous solutions were first measured by means of an NMR laboratory relaxometer, as a function of concentration and temperature. The obtained T1 and T2 values, once renormalized at the scanner temperature, were used as reference values for the MRI mapping measurements of the MnCl2 relaxation times. By using different clinical MRI scanners and sequences, we found a good agreement for standard and turbo sequences (limits of agreement: 5% for IR, SE, IR-TSE; 10% for TSE), while an under-estimation and an over-estimation were found respectively for MOLLI and T2-prep TrueFISP, as already reported in the literature. The linearity of the relaxation rates with the concentration predicted by the Solomon-Bloembergen-Morgan theory was observed for every dataset at all temperatures, except for T2-prep TrueFISP maps results. Some preliminary results of an in vivo experiment are also presented.

Estimation of patient skin dose in fluoroscopy: summary of a joint report by AAPM TG357 and EFOMP.

BACKGROUND: Physicians use fixed C-arm fluoroscopy equipment with many interventional radiological and cardiological procedures. The associated effective dose to a patient is generally considered low risk, as the benefit-risk ratio is almost certainly highly favorable. However, X-ray-induced skin injuries may occur due to high absorbed patient skin doses from complex fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGI). Suitable action levels for patient-specific follow-up could improve the clinical practice. There is a need for a refined metric regarding follow-up of X-ray-induced patient injuries and the knowledge gap regarding skin dose-related patient information from fluoroscopy devices must be filled. The most useful metric to indicate a risk of erythema, epilation or greater skin injury that also includes actionable information is the peak skin dose, that is, the largest dose to a region of skin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The report is based on a comprehensive review of best practices and methods to estimate peak skin dose found in the scientific literature and situates the importance of the Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine (DICOM) standard detailing pertinent information contained in the Radiation Dose Structured Report (RDSR) and DICOM image headers for FGI devices. Furthermore, the expertise of the task group members and consultants have been used to bridge and discuss different methods and associated available DICOM information for peak skin dose estimation. RESULTS: The report contributes an extensive summary and discussion of the current state of the art in estimating peak skin dose with FGI procedures with regard to methodology and DICOM information. Improvements in skin dose estimation efforts with more refined DICOM information are suggested and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The endeavor of skin dose estimation is greatly aided by the continuing efforts of the scientific medical physics community, the numerous technology enhancements, the dose-controlling features provided by the FGI device manufacturers, and the emergence and greater availability of the DICOM RDSR. Refined and new dosimetry systems continue to evolve and form the infrastructure for further improvements in accuracy. Dose-related content and information systems capable of handling big data are emerging for patient dose monitoring and quality assurance tools for large-scale multihospital enterprises.

Correlation between lung ultrasound and chest CT patterns with estimation of pulmonary burden in COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: The capability of lung ultrasound (LUS) to distinguish the different pulmonary patterns of COVID-19 and quantify the disease burden compared to chest CT is still unclear. METHODS: PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients who underwent both LUS and chest CT at the Emergency Department were retrospectively analysed. In both modalities, twelve peripheral lung zones were identified and given a Severity Score basing on main lesion pattern. On CT scans the well-aerated lung volume (%WALV) was visually estimated. Per-patient and per-zone assessments of LUS classification performance taking CT findings as reference were performed, further revisioning the images in case of discordant results. Correlations between number of disease-positive lung zones, Severity Score and %WALV on both LUS and CT were assessed. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to determine LUS performance in detecting %WALV ≤ 70 %. RESULTS: The study included 219 COVID-19 patients with abnormal chest CT. LUS correctly identified as positive 217 (99 %) patients, but per-zone analysis showed sensitivity = 75 % and specificity = 66 %. The revision of the 121 (55 %) cases with positive LUS and negative CT revealed COVID-compatible lesions in 42 (38 %) CT scans. Number of disease-positive zones, Severity Score and %WALV between LUS and CT showed moderate correlations. The AUCs for LUS Severity Score and number of LUS-positive zones did not differ in detecting %WALV ≤ 70 %. CONCLUSION: LUS in COVID-19 is valuable for case identification but shows only moderate correlation with CT findings as for lesion patterns and severity quantification. The number of disease-positive lung zones in LUS alone was sufficient to discriminate relevant disease burden.

MRI only in a patient with prostate cancer with bilateral metal hip prostheses: case study.

OBJECTIVE: To outline a practical method of performing prostate cancer radiotherapy in patients with bilateral metal hip prostheses with the standard resources available in a modern general hospital. The proposed workflow is based exclusively on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to avoid computed tomography (CT) artifacts. CASE DESCRIPTION: This study concerns a 73-year-old man with bilateral hip prostheses with an elevated risk prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance images with assigned electron densities were used for planning purposes, generating a synthetic CT (sCT). Imaging acquisition was performed with an optimized Dixon sequence on a 1.5T MRI scanner. The images were contoured by autosegmentation software, based on an MRI database of 20 patients. The sCT was generated assigning averaged electron densities to each contour. Two volumetric modulated arc therapy plans, a complete arc and a partial one, where the beam entrances through the prostheses were avoided for about 50° on both sides, were compared. The feasibility of matching daily cone beam CT (CBCT) with MRI reference images was also tested by visual evaluations of different radiation oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: The use of magnetic resonance images improved accuracy in targets and organs at risk (OARs) contouring. The complete arc plan was chosen because of 10% lower mean and maximum doses to prostheses with the same planning target volume coverage and OAR sparing. The image quality of the match between performed CBCTs and MRI was considered acceptable. The proposed method seems promising to improve radiotherapy treatments for this complex category of patients.

Radiation dose management systems-requirements and recommendations for users from the ESR EuroSafe Imaging initiative.

The European Directive 2013/59/Euratom requires member states of the European Union to ensure justification and optimisation of radiological procedures and store information on patient exposure for analysis and quality assurance. The EuroSafe Imaging campaign of the European Society of Radiology created a working group (WG) on "Dose Management" with the aim to provide European recommendations on the implementation of dose management systems (DMS) in clinical practice. The WG follows Action 4: "Promote dose management systems to establish local, national, and European diagnostic reference levels (DRL)" of the EuroSafe Imaging Call for Action 2018. DMS are designed for medical practitioners, radiographers, medical physics experts (MPE) and other health professionals involved in imaging to support their tasks and duties of radiation protection in accordance with local and national requirements. The WG analysed requirements and critical points when installing a DMS and classified the individual functions at different performance levels. KEY POINTS: • DMS are very helpful software tools for monitoring patient exposure, optimisation, compliance with DRLs and quality assurance. • DMS can help to fulfil dosimetric aspects of the European Directive 2013/59/Euratom. • The EuroSafe WG analyses DMS requirements and gives recommendations for users.

Impact of inter-reader contouring variability on textural radiomics of colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Radiomics is expected to improve the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed at evaluating the impact of liver lesion contouring as a source of variability on radiomic features (RFs). METHODS: After Ethics Committee approval, 70 liver metastases in 17 CRC patients were segmented on contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans by two residents and checked by experienced radiologists. RFs from grey level co-occurrence and run length matrices were extracted from three-dimensional (3D) regions of interest (ROIs) and the largest two-dimensional (2D) ROIs. Inter-reader variability was evaluated with Dice coefficient and Hausdorff distance, whilst its impact on RFs was assessed using mean relative change (MRC) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). For the main lesion of each patient, one reader also segmented a circular ROI on the same image used for the 2D ROI. RESULTS: The best inter-reader contouring agreement was observed for 2D ROIs according to both Dice coefficient (median 0.85, interquartile range 0.78-0.89) and Hausdorff distance (0.21 mm, 0.14-0.31 mm). Comparing RF values, MRC ranged 0-752% for 2D and 0-1567% for 3D. For 24/32 RFs (75%), MRC was lower for 2D than for 3D. An ICC > 0.90 was observed for more RFs for 2D (53%) than for 3D (34%). Only 2/32 RFs (6%) showed a variability between 2D and circular ROIs higher than inter-reader variability. CONCLUSIONS: A 2D contouring approach may help mitigate overall inter-reader variability, albeit stable RFs can be extracted from both 3D and 2D segmentations of CRC liver metastases.

Radiomics predicts response of individual HER2-amplified colorectal cancer liver metastases in patients treated with HER2-targeted therapy.

The aim of our study was to develop and validate a machine learning algorithm to predict response of individual HER2-amplified colorectal cancer liver metastases (lmCRC) undergoing dual HER2-targeted therapy. Twenty-four radiomics features were extracted after 3D manual segmentation of 141 lmCRC on pretreatment portal CT scans of a cohort including 38 HER2-amplified patients; feature selection was then performed using genetic algorithms. lmCRC were classified as nonresponders (R-), if their largest diameter increased more than 10% at a CT scan performed after 3 months of treatment, responders (R+) otherwise. Sensitivity, specificity, negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values in correctly classifying individual lesion and overall patient response were assessed on a training dataset and then validated on a second dataset using a Gaussian naïve Bayesian classifier. Per-lesion sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV were 89%, 85%, 93%, 78% and 90%, 42%, 73%, 71% respectively in the testing and validation datasets. Per-patient sensitivity and specificity were 92% and 86%. Heterogeneous response was observed in 9 of 38 patients (24%). Five of nine patients were carriers of nonresponder lesions correctly classified as such by our radiomics signature, including four of seven harboring only one nonresponder lesion. The developed method has been proven effective in predicting behavior of individual metastases to targeted treatment in a cohort of HER2 amplified patients. The model accurately detects responder lesions and identifies nonresponder lesions in patients with heterogeneous response, potentially paving the way to multimodal treatment in selected patients. Further validation will be needed to confirm our findings.

Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: selecting candidate performance indicators.

BACKGROUND: In the scope of the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) subgroup was tasked to identify breast cancer screening programme (BCSP) performance indicators, including their acceptable and desirable levels, which are associated with breast cancer (BC) mortality. This paper documents the methodology used for the indicator selection. METHODS: The indicators were identified through a multi-stage process. First, a scoping review was conducted to identify existing performance indicators. Second, building on existing frameworks for making well-informed health care choices, a specific conceptual framework was developed to guide the indicator selection. Third, two group exercises including a rating and ranking survey were conducted for indicator selection using pre-determined criteria, such as: relevance, measurability, accurateness, ethics and understandability. The selected indicators were mapped onto a BC screening pathway developed by the M&E subgroup to illustrate the steps of BC screening common to all EU countries. RESULTS: A total of 96 indicators were identified from an initial list of 1325 indicators. After removing redundant and irrelevant indicators and adding those missing, 39 candidate indicators underwent the rating and ranking exercise. Based on the results, the M&E subgroup selected 13 indicators: screening coverage, participation rate, recall rate, breast cancer detection rate, invasive breast cancer detection rate, cancers > 20 mm, cancers ≤10 mm, lymph node status, interval cancer rate, episode sensitivity, time interval between screening and first treatment, benign open surgical biopsy rate, and mastectomy rate. CONCLUSION: This systematic approach led to the identification of 13 BCSP candidate performance indicators to be further evaluated for their association with BC mortality.

Standardization of CT radiomics features for multi-center analysis: impact of software settings and parameters.

The aim of this multicentric study is an inter-center benchmarking, to assess how different set tools applied to the same radiomics workflow affected the radiomics features (RFs) values. This topic is of key importance to start collaboration between different centers and to bring radiomic studies from benchmark to bedside. A per-lesion analysis was performed on 56 metastases (mts) selected from 14 patients. A single radiologist performed the segmentation of all mts, and RFs were extracted from the same segmentation of each mts, using two different software and file formats. Potential sources of discrepancies were evaluated. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to describe how strongly the same radiomic measurements calculated in the two different centers resemble each other. Moreover, means of the relative changes of each RF were calculated, compared and gradually reduced. We showed that, after matching all formulas, discrepancies in RFs calculation between two centers ranged from 1% to 277%. Therefore, we evaluated other sources of variability using a stepwise approach, which led us to reduce the inter-center discrepancies to 0% for 22/25 RFs and below 2% for 3 RFs out of 25. In this study we demonstrated that different radiomic applications and masks formats might strongly impact the computation of some RFs. Therefore, when dealing with multi-center studies it is mandatory to adopt all strategies that can help in limiting the differences, thus keeping in mind the feasibility of these strategies in large cohort studies.

Validation of a dose tracking software for skin dose map calculation in interventional radiology.

PURPOSE: Validate the skin dose software within the radiation dose index monitoring system NEXO[DOSE]® (Bracco Injeneering S.A., Lausanne, Switzerland). It provides the skin dose distribution in interventional radiology (IR) procedures. METHODS: To determine the skin dose distribution and the Peak Skin Dose (PSD) in IR procedures, the software uses exposure and geometrical parameters taken from the radiation dose structured report and additional information specific to each angiographic system. To test the accuracy of the software, GafChromic® XR-RV3 films, wrapped under a cylindrical PMMA phantom, were irradiated with different setups. Calculations and films results are compared in terms of absolute dose and geometric accuracy, using two angiographic systems (Philips Integris Allura FD20, Siemens AXIOM-ArtisZeego). RESULTS: Calculated and film measured PSD values agree with an average difference of 7% ± 5%. The discrepancies in dose evaluation increase up to 33% in lower dose regions, because the algorithm does not consider the out-of-field scatter contribution of the neighboring fields, which is more significant in these areas. Regarding the geometric accuracy, the differences between the simulated dose spatial distributions and the measured ones are<3 mm (4%) in simple tests and 5 mm (5%) in setups closer to clinical practice. Moreover, similar results are obtained for the two studied angiographic system vendors. CONCLUSIONS: NEXO[DOSE]® provides an accurate skin dose distribution and PSD estimate. It will allow faster and more accurate monitoring of patient follow-up in the future.

Patient organ and effective dose estimation in CT: comparison of four software applications.

BACKGROUND: Radiation dose in computed tomography (CT) has become a topic of high interest due to the increasing numbers of CT examinations performed worldwide. Hence, dose tracking and organ dose calculation software are increasingly used. We evaluated the organ dose variability associated with the use of different software applications or calculation methods. METHODS: We tested four commercial software applications on CT protocols actually in use in our hospital: CT-Expo, NCICT, NCICTX, and Virtual Dose. We compared dose coefficients, estimated organ doses and effective doses obtained by the four software applications by varying exposure parameters. Our results were also compared with estimates reported by the software authors. RESULTS: All four software applications showed dependence on tube voltage and volume CT dose index, while only CT-Expo was also dependent on other exposure parameters, in particular scanner model and pitch caused a variability till 50%. We found a disagreement between our results and those reported by the software authors (up to 600%), mainly due to a different extent of examined body regions. The relative range of the comparison of the four software applications was within 35% for most organs inside the scan region, but increased over the 100% for organs partially irradiated and outside the scan region. For effective doses, this variability was less evident (ranging from 9 to 36%). CONCLUSIONS: The two main sources of organ dose variability were the software application used and the scan region set. Dose estimate must be related to the process used for its calculation.

Analysis of a multicentre cloud-based CT dosimetric database: preliminary results.

BACKGROUND: To manage and analyse dosimetric data provided by computed tomography (CT) scanners from four Italian hospitals. METHODS: A radiation dose index monitoring (RDIM) software was used to collect anonymised exams stored in a cloud server. Since hospitals use different names for the same procedure, digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) tags more appropriate to describe exams were selected and associated to study common names (SCNs) from a radiology playbook according to scan region and use of contrast media. Retrospective analysis was carried out to describe population and to evaluate dosimetric indexes and inaccuracies associated with SCNs. RESULTS: More than 400 procedures were clustered into 95 SCNs, but 78% of exams on adults were described with only 10 SCNs. Median values of dose-length product (DLP) and volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol) for three analysed SCNs were in agreement with those previously published. The percentage of inaccuracies does not heavily affect the dosimetric analysis on the whole cloud, since variations in median values reached at most 8%. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a cloud-based RDIM software and related issues were described, showing the strength of the chosen playbook-based clustering and its usefulness for homogeneous data analysis. This approach may allow for optimisation actions, accurate assessment of the risk associated with radiation exposure, comparison of different facilities, and, last but not least, collection of information for the implementation of the 2013/59 Euratom Directive.

Practical recommendations for the application of DE 59/2013.

The 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.