Recurrent medical imaging exposures for the care of patients: one way forward.

Medical imaging is both valuable and essential in the care of patients. Much of this imaging depends on ionizing radiation with attendant responsibilities for judicious use when performing an examination. This responsibility applies in settings of both individual as well as multiple (recurrent) imaging with associated repeated radiation exposures. In addressing the roles and responsibilities of the medical communities in the paradigm of recurrent imaging, both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) have issued position statements, each affirmed by other organizations. The apparent difference in focus and approach has resulted in a lack of clarity and continued debate. Aiming towards a coherent approach in dealing with radiation exposure in recurrent imaging, the IAEA convened a panel of experts, the purpose of which was to identify common ground and reconcile divergent perspectives. The effort has led to clarifying recommendations for radiation exposure aspects of recurrent imaging, including the relevance of patient agency and the provider-patient covenant in clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: An increasing awareness, generating some lack of clarity and divergence in perspectives, with patients receiving relatively high radiation doses (e.g., ≥ 100 mSv) from recurrent imaging warrants a multi-stakeholder accord for the benefit of patients, providers, and the imaging community. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent medical imaging can result in an accumulation of exposures which exceeds 100 milli Sieverts. • Professional organizations have different perspectives on roles and responsibilities for recurrent imaging. • An expert panel reconciles differing perspectives for addressing radiation exposure from recurrent medical imaging.

Communication of radiation risk from imaging studies: an IAEA-coordinated international survey.

The purpose of this IAEA-coordinated international study was to understand aspects related to the communication of radiation risk from imaging studies, such as how often imaging department personnel and referring physicians are asked about radiation risks in diagnostic imaging, who asks about these risks, how often professionals are able to provide satisfactory answers using qualitative metrics and how often quantitative risk estimates are needed. A web-based questionnaire with ten questions was completed by 386 healthcare professionals from 63 countries from all four continents, including clinicians/referring physicians (42.5%), radiologists or nuclear medicine physicians (26.7%), medical physicists (23.1%), radiographers/radiological technologists (6.2%) and others (1.6%). The results indicate that radiation risk-related questions are largely asked by patients (73.1%) and parents of child patients (38.6%), and 78% of the professionals believe they are able to answer those questions using qualitative metrics such as very small/minimal, small, medium rather than number of cancers likely occurring. The vast majority, with over three times higher frequency, indicated the purpose of knowing previous radiological exams as 'both clinical information and radiation exposure history' rather than 'only clinical information'. Nearly two-thirds of the clinicians/referring physicians indicated that knowing the radiation exposure history of the patient will affect their decision-making for the next exam, as against only about one-fifth who said 'no, it will not affect their decision-making'. The same question, when addressed to radiologists, resulted in a slightly larger fraction of about three-quarters who said 'yes', as opposed to a smaller fraction of about 12% who said 'no, it will not affect their decision-making'. Mapping the present situation of communication of benefits and risks for patients is important and may be the basis of further analysis, regular monitoring and possibly a target for clinical audits. Further studies focused on specific professional groups might help in obtaining á deeper understanding of the need for practical communication tools.

Strengthening radiation protection education and training of health professionals: conclusions from an IAEA meeting.

In March 2021 the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organised an online Technical Meeting on Developing Effective Methods for Radiation Protection Education and Training of Health Professionals with attendance of 230 participants representing 66 Member States and 24 international organizations, professional bodies and safety alliances. By means of a pre-meeting survey, presentations by experts, topical panel discussions and post-meeting feedback to the meeting summary, the meeting identified strengths, common weaknesses and possible solutions and actions for improving radiation protection education and training of health professionals. Available guidelines and resources for radiation protection training were also reviewed. The meeting discussion resulted in a strong consensus for the need of: (a) international guidance on education and training in radiation protection and safety for health professionals, (b) an international description of minimum standards of initial and ongoing competence and qualification in radiation protection for relevant professional groups, considering the available recommendations at international and regional levels. The proposed actions include provisions for train-the-trainer credentialing and facility training accreditation, balance betwee the online and face-to-face training, improved on-the job training, as well as improved inclusion in training programmes of aspects related to application of new technologies, ethical aspects, development of communication skills, and use of software tools for improving justification and optimisation. The need for making the ongoing training practical, applicable, and useful to the trainee was highlighted. The international consultation initiated by the IAEA was appreciated as a good approach to understand and promote coordination and collaboration at all levels, for best results in education and training in radiation protection of health professionals. Implementing such a holistic approach to education and training in radiation protection would contribute towards qualification and competence of health professionals needed to ensure application of high standards for quality and safety in medical uses of ionizing radiation.

Variations in CT Utilization, Protocols, and Radiation Doses in COVID-19 Pneumonia: Results from 28 Countries in the IAEA Study.

Background There is lack of guidance on specific CT protocols for imaging patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Purpose To assess international variations in CT utilization, protocols, and radiation doses in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Materials and Methods In this retrospective data collection study, the International Atomic Energy Agency coordinated a survey between May and July 2020 regarding CT utilization, protocols, and radiation doses from 62 health care sites in 34 countries across five continents for CT examinations performed in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The questionnaire obtained information on local prevalence, method of diagnosis, most frequent imaging, indications for CT, and specific policies on use of CT in COVID-19 pneumonia. Collected data included general information (patient age, weight, clinical indication), CT equipment (CT make and model, year of installation, number of detector rows), scan protocols (body region, scan phases, tube current and potential), and radiation dose descriptors (CT dose index and dose length product). Descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations were performed. Results Data from 782 patients (median age, 59 years [interquartile range, 15 years]) from 54 health care sites in 28 countries were evaluated. Less than one-half of the health care sites used CT for initial diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia and three-fourths used CT for assessing disease severity. CT dose index varied based on CT vendors (7-11 mGy; P < .001), number of detector rows (8-9 mGy; P < .001), year of CT installation (7-10 mGy; P = .006), and reconstruction techniques (7-10 mGy; P = .03). Multiphase chest CT examinations performed at 20% of sites (11 of 54) were associated with higher dose length product compared with single-phase chest CT examinations performed in 80% of sites (43 of 54) (P = .008). Conclusion CT use, scan protocols, and radiation doses in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia showed wide variation across health care sites within the same and between different countries. Many patients were imaged multiple times and/or with multiphase CT scan protocols. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee in this issue.

Use of Multiphase CT Protocols in 18 Countries: Appropriateness and Radiation Doses.

PURPOSE: To assess the frequency, appropriateness, and radiation doses associated with multiphase computed tomography (CT) protocols for routine chest and abdomen-pelvis examinations in 18 countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In collaboration with the International Atomic Energy Agency, multi-institutional data on clinical indications, number of scan phases, scan parameters, and radiation dose descriptors (CT dose-index volume; dose-length product [DLP]) were collected for routine chest (n = 1706 patients) and abdomen-pelvis (n = 426 patients) CT from 18 institutions in Asia, Africa, and Europe. Two radiologists scored the need for each phase based on clinical indications (1 = not indicated, 2 = probably indicated, 3 = indicated). We surveyed 11 institutions for their practice regarding single-phase and multiphase CT examinations. Data were analyzed with the Student t test. RESULTS: Most institutions use multiphase protocols for routine chest (10/18 institutions) and routine abdomen-pelvis (10/11 institutions that supplied data for abdomen-pelvis) CT examinations. Most institutions (10/11) do not modify scan parameters between different scan phases. Respective total DLP for 1-, 2-, and 3-phase routine chest CT was 272, 518, and 820 mGy·cm, respectively. Corresponding values for 1- to 5-phase routine abdomen-pelvis CT were 400, 726, 1218, 1214, and 1458 mGy cm, respectively. For multiphase CT protocols, there were no differences in scan parameters and radiation doses between different phases for either chest or abdomen-pelvis CT (P = 0.40-0.99). Multiphase CT examinations were unnecessary in 100% of routine chest CT and in 63% of routine abdomen-pelvis CT examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Multiphase scan protocols for the routine chest and abdomen-pelvis CT examinations are unnecessary, and their use increases radiation dose.

Chest CT practice and protocols for COVID-19 from radiation dose management perspective.

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has upended the world with over 6.6 million infections and over 391,000 deaths worldwide. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay is the preferred method of diagnosis of COVID-19 infection. Yet, chest CT is often used in patients with known or suspected COVID-19 due to regional preferences, lack of availability of PCR assays, and false-negative PCR assays, as well as for monitoring of disease progression, complications, and treatment response. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organized a webinar to discuss CT practice and protocol optimization from a radiation protection perspective on April 9, 2020, and surveyed participants from five continents. We review important aspects of CT in COVID-19 infection from the justification of its use to specific scan protocols for optimizing radiation dose and diagnostic information.Key Points• Chest CT provides useful information in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia.• When indicated, chest CT in most patients with COVID-19 pneumonia must be performed with non-contrast, low-dose protocol.• Although chest CT has high sensitivity for diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia, CT findings are non-specific and overlap with other viral infections including influenza and H1N1.

Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action.

OBJECTIVES: To have a global picture of the recurrent use of CT imaging to a level where cumulative effective dose (CED) to individual patients may be exceeding 100 mSv at which organ doses typically are in a range at which radiation effects are of concern METHODS: The IAEA convened a meeting in 2019 with participants from 26 countries, representatives of various organizations, and experts in radiology, medical physics, radiation biology, and epidemiology. Participants were asked to collect data prior to the meeting on cumulative radiation doses to assess the magnitude of patients above a defined level of CED. RESULTS: It was observed that the number of patients with CED ≥ 100 mSv is much larger than previously known or anticipated. Studies were presented in the meeting with data from about 3.2 million patients who underwent imaging procedures over periods of between 1 and 5 years in different hospitals. It is probable that an additional 0.9 million patients reach the CED ≥ 100 mSv every year globally. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for urgent actions by all stakeholders to address the issue of high cumulative radiation doses to patients. The actions include development of appropriateness criteria/referral guidelines by professional societies for patients who require recurrent imaging studies, development of CT machines with lower radiation dose than today by manufacturers, and development of policies by risk management organizations to enhance patient radiation safety. Alert values for cumulative radiation exposures of patients should be set up and introduced in dose monitoring systems. KEY POINTS: • Recurrent radiological imaging procedures leading to high radiation dose to patients are more common than ever before. • Tracking of radiation exposure of individual patients provides useful information on cumulative radiation dose. • There is a need for urgent actions by all stakeholders to address the issue of high cumulative radiation doses to patients.

Radiation exposure of patients during endourological procedures: IAEA-SEGUR study.

Fluoroscopy is increasingly used to guide minimally invasive endourological procedures and optimised protocols are needed to minimise radiation exposure while achieving best treatment results. This multi-center study of radiation exposure of patients was conducted by the South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research (SEGUR), in cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Seven clinical centers from the SEGUR group collected data for 325 procedures performed within a three-months period, including standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), mini PCNL, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), semirigid ureterorenoscopy (URS) and flexible URS. Data included: air kerma area product (PKA), air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (Ka,r), fluoroscopy time (FT), number of radiographic images (N) and fluoroscopy pulse rate, as well as total procedure duration, size and location of stones. Data were centrally analysed and statistically compared. MedianPKAvalues per center varied 2-fold for RIRS (0.80-1.79 Gy cm2), 7.1 fold for mini-PCNL (1.39-9.90 Gy cm2), 7.3 fold for PCNL (2.40-17.50 Gy cm2), 19 fold (0.13-2.51 Gy cm2) for semi-rigid URS and 29-fold for flexible URS (0.10-2.90 Gy cm2). LowerPKAandKa,rwere associated with use of lower FT,Nand lower fluoroscopy pulse rate. FT varied from 0.1 to 14 min, a small fraction of the total procedure time, ranging from 10 to 225 min. HigherNwas associated with higherPKAandKa,r. Higher medianPKAin PCNL was associated with the use of supine compared to prone position. No correlation was found between the concrement size and procedure duration, FT,PKAorKa,r. Dose values for RIRS were significantly lower compared to PCNL. The maximumKa,rvalue of 377 mGy was under the threshold for radiation induced skin erythema. The study demonstrated a potential for patient dose reduction by lowering FT andN, using pulsed fluoroscopy and beam collimation.

Medical imaging dose optimisation from ground up: expert opinion of an international summit.

As in any medical intervention, there is either a known or an anticipated benefit to the patient from undergoing a medical imaging procedure. This benefit is generally significant, as demonstrated by the manner in which medical imaging has transformed clinical medicine. At the same time, when it comes to imaging that deploys ionising radiation, there is a potential associated risk from radiation. Radiation risk has been recognised as a key liability in the practice of medical imaging, creating a motivation for radiation dose optimisation. The level of radiation dose and risk in imaging varies but is generally low. Thus, from the epidemiological perspective, this makes the estimation of the precise level of associated risk highly uncertain. However, in spite of the low magnitude and high uncertainty of this risk, its possibility cannot easily be refuted. Therefore, given the moral obligation of healthcare providers, 'first, do no harm,' there is an ethical obligation to mitigate this risk. Precisely how to achieve this goal scientifically and practically within a coherent system has been an open question. To address this need, in 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organised a summit to clarify the role of Diagnostic Reference Levels to optimise imaging dose, summarised into an initial report (Järvinen et al 2017 Journal of Medical Imaging 4 031214). Through a consensus building exercise, the summit further concluded that the imaging optimisation goal goes beyond dose alone, and should include image quality as a means to include both the benefit and the safety of the exam. The present, second report details the deliberation of the summit on imaging optimisation.

IAEA survey of paediatric computed tomography practice in 40 countries in Asia, Europe, Latin America and Africa: procedures and protocols.

OBJECTIVE: To survey procedures and protocols in paediatric computed tomography (CT) in 40 less resourced countries. METHODS: Under a project of the International Atomic Energy Agency, 146 CT facilities in 40 countries of Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America responded to an electronic survey of CT technology, exposure parameters, CT protocols and doses. RESULTS: Modern MDCT systems are available in 77 % of the facilities surveyed with dedicated paediatric CT protocols available in 94 %. However, protocols for some age groups were unavailable in around 50 % of the facilities surveyed. Indication-based protocols were used in 57 % of facilities. Estimates of radiation dose using CTDI or DLP from standard CT protocols demonstrated wide variation up to a factor of 100. CTDI(vol) values for the head and chest were between two and five times those for an adult at some sites. Sedation and use of shielding were frequently reported; immobilisation was not. Records of exposure factors were kept at 49 % of sites. CONCLUSION: There is significant potential for improvement in CT practice and protocol use for children in less resourced countries. Dose estimates for young children varied widely. This survey provides critical baseline data for ongoing quality improvement efforts by the IAEA.

SURVEY OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY PRACTICE IN UKRAINE AND ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL DIAGNOSTIC REFERENCE LEVELS FOR MOST COMMON CT EXAMINATIONS OF ADULTS.

This study reports results of the first nationwide survey of computed tomography (CT) practice in Ukraine and proposed national diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for common CT examinations. The collected data included characteristics of CT scanners, frequency of CT exams per anatomical region, dose indices CTDIvol and dose-length product (DLP). National DRLs were proposed at the 75th percentile of median dose indices distributions for four common CT protocols: head without contrast (brain examinations for stroke and trauma), routine chest without contrast, single-phase contrast-enhanced CT of abdomen and pelvis and oncology protocol (chest-abdomen-pelvis). The results showed 4- to 9-fold variations of median dose indices between CT scanners for the same type of examination. The following values of the CTDIvol and DLP were proposed as national DRLs: 59 mGy and 1130 mGy•cm for head, 14 mGy and 492 mGy•cm for chest, 22 mGy and 845 mGy•cm for abdomen/pelvis and 2120 mGy•cm for oncological protocol.

Establishment and utilization of diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging: Results from a survey and consultation under the IAEA technical cooperation programme in Europe and Central Asia.

The paper presents the results of the activities under the IAEA Technical Cooperation programme in Europe and Central Asia, aiming to improve utilization of diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in the region through identifying status, problems, and gaps in establishing and utilization of the DRLs, and suggesting potential solutions. Status was identified through a survey with two electronic questionnaires answered by the regulatory bodies for radiation protection of 26 IAEA Member States and 34 representatives of relevant professional bodies of medical physics, radiology, nuclear medicine or radiographers. Problems, good practices and potential solutions were identified as a result of the discussion during a regional workshop with 50 nominated representatives of 21 countries. Results were disseminated through open webinars. Existing gaps are related to the lack of adequate regulations in some countries, inadequate awareness of radiological professionals of DRLs as a tool for optimization, insufficient cooperation among relevant stakeholders, education, and staffing. Strengthening of the cooperation between regulatory and professional bodies could benefit the awareness and consequently the utilization of DRLs in clinical practice. The need of improved education and training of the DRL process was highlighted. Improved inspection procedures and education of inspectors would also support the process. Access to clinically qualified medical physicists was found to be critical for the DRL utilization. Suggestions were placed for continuous IAEA assistance through training, guidance and expert support.

IAEA survey of pediatric CT practice in 40 countries in Asia, Europe, Latin America, and Africa: Part 1, frequency and appropriateness.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency of pediatric CT in 40 less-resourced countries and to determine the level of appropriateness in CT use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on the increase in the number of CT examinations during 2007 and 2009 and appropriate use of CT examinations were collected, using standard forms, from 146 CT facilities at 126 hospitals. RESULTS: The lowest frequency of pediatric CT examinations in 2009 was in European facilities (4.3%), and frequencies in Asia (12.2%) and Africa (7.8%) were twice as high. Head CT is the most common CT examination in children, amounting to nearly 75% of all pediatric CT examinations. Although regulations in many countries assign radiologists with the main responsibility of deciding whether a radiologic examination should be performed, in fact, radiologists alone were responsible for only 6.3% of situations. Written referral guidelines for imaging were not available in almost one half of the CT facilities. Appropriateness criteria for CT examinations in children did not always follow guidelines set by agencies, in particular, for patients with accidental head trauma, infants with congenital torticollis, children with possible ventriculoperitoneal shunt malfunction, and young children (< 5 years old) with acute sinusitis. In about one third of situations, nonavailability of previous images and records on previously received patient doses have the potential to lead to unnecessary examinations and radiation doses. CONCLUSION: With increasing use of CT in children and a lack of use of appropriateness criteria, there is a strong need to implement guidelines to avoid unnecessary radiation doses to children.

Accounting for radiation exposure from previous CT exams while deciding on the next exam: What do referring clinicians think?

PURPOSE: To obtain clinicians' views of the need to account for radiation exposure from previous CT scans and the advisability of a regulatory mechanism to control the number of CT scans for an individual patient. METHODS: A convenience survey was conducted by emailing a link to a three-question electronic survey to clinicians in many countries, mostly through radiology and radiation protection contacts. RESULTS: 505 responses were received from 24 countries. 293 respondents (58%) understand that current regulations do not limit the number of CT scans that can be prescribed for a single patient in a year. When asked whether there should be a regulation to limit the number of CT scans that can be prescribed for a single patient in one year, only a small fraction (143, 28%) answered 'No', 182 (36%) answered 'Maybe' and 166 (33%) answered 'Yes'. Most respondents (337; 67%) think that radiation risk should form part of the consideration when deciding whether to request a CT exam. A minority (138; 27%) think the decision should be based only on the medical indication for the CT exam. Comparison among the 4 countries (South Korea, Hungary, USA and Canada) with the largest number of respondents indicated wide variations in responses. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of the surveyed clinicians consider radiation risk, in addition to clinical factors, when prescribing CT exams. Most respondents are in favor of, or would consider, regulation to control the number of CT scans that could be performed on a patient annually.

Radiation protection perspective to recurrent medical imaging: what is known and what more is needed?

This review summarises the current knowledge about recurrent radiological imaging and associated cumulative doses to patients. The recent conservative estimates are for around 0.9 million patients globally who cumulate radiation doses above 100 mSv, where evidence exists for cancer risk elevation. Around one in five is estimated to be under the age of 50. Recurrent imaging is used for managing various health conditions and chronic diseases such as malignancies, trauma, end-stage kidney disease, cardiovascular diseases, Crohn's disease, urolithiasis, cystic pulmonary disease. More studies are needed from different parts of the world to understand the magnitude and appropriateness. The analysis identified areas of future work to improve radiation protection of individuals who are submitted to frequent imaging. These include access to dose saving imaging technologies; improved imaging strategies and appropriateness process; specific optimisation tailored to the clinical condition and patient habitus; wider utilisation of the automatic exposure monitoring systems with an integrated option for individual exposure tracking in standardised patient-specific risk metrics; improved training and communication. The integration of the clinical and exposure history data will support improved knowledge about radiation risks from low doses and individual radiosensitivity. The radiation protection framework will need to respond to the challenge of recurrent imaging and high individual doses. The radiation protection perspective complements the clinical perspective, and the risk to benefit analysis must account holistically for all incidental and long-term benefits and risks for patients, their clinical history and specific needs. This is a step toward the patient-centric health care.

A phantom study to optimise the automatic tube current modulation for chest CT in COVID-19.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The expert organisations recommend more cautious use of thoracic computed tomography (CT), opting for low-dose protocols. We aimed at determining a threshold value of automatic tube current modulation noise index below which there is a chance to miss an onset of ground-glass opacities (GGO) in COVID-19. A team of radiologists and medical physicists performed 25 phantom CT studies using different automatic tube current modulation settings (SUREExposure3D technology). We then conducted a retrospective evaluation of the chest CT images from 22 patients with COVID-19 and calculated the density difference between the GGO and unaffected tissue. Finally, the results were matched to the phantom study results to determine the minimum noise index threshold value. The minimum density difference at the onset of COVID-19 was 252 HU (p < 0.001). This was found to correspond to the SUREExposure 3D noise index of 36. We established the noise index threshold of 36 for the Canon scanner without iterative reconstructions, allowing for a decrease in the dose-length product by 80%. The proposed protocol needs to be validated in a prospective study.

Radiation Exposure of Surgical Team During Endourological Procedures: International Atomic Energy Agency-South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research Study.

Introduction: Fluoroscopy-guided endourology procedures require proper radiation protection to minimize radiation risk. This multicenter study aimed at investigating radiation protection practice and related radiation exposure of operating team members. Materials and Methods: Six endourology centers from the South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research answered questionnaires and collected data of 315 procedures performed within a 3-months period, with simultaneous measurement of dose to staff and dose area product (DAP) to patient. A pair of calibrated personal dosimeters, one for body and one for eye-lens dose, was worn by all key staff members. Dosimeters were centrally calibrated, measured, and analyzed. Results: The annual workload ranged from 173 to 865 procedures per center. Practice of personal dose monitoring and use of radiation protection shielding was found to be inconsistent. Lead aprons and thyroid collars were used by all, whereas protective eyewear was used in only half of centers. Due to the regular use of protective aprons, the whole-body dose of all 44 monitored staff members was safely below the regulatory dose limits. Eye-lens dose of 17 (14 urologists and 3 assisting staff) was above the dosimeter detection level, and dose per procedure varied from <10 to 63 µSv. The highest annual eye-lens dose of 13.5 mSv was found for the surgeon in the busiest department by using an over-the-couch X-ray tube without a ceiling suspended screen. Working closer to patient body with no protection resulted in a six-time higher eye-lens dose per DAP for a surgeon compared with others in the same center. Lower eye-dose per procedure was associated with lower DAP to patient and with the use of an under-the-couch tube, lower fluoroscopy pulse rate, collimation, fluoroscopy time, and acquired images. Conclusions: The study results call for the need to establish standard protocols about use of fluoroscopy during endourology procedures and to increase radiation protection knowledge and awareness of surgical staff.

Investigating centering, scan length, and arm position impact on radiation dose across 4 countries from 4 continents during pandemic: Mitigating key radioprotection issues.

PURPOSE: Optimization of CT scan practices can help achieve and maintain optimal radiation protection. The aim was to assess centering, scan length, and positioning of patients undergoing chest CT for suspected or known COVID-19 pneumonia and to investigate their effect on associated radiation doses. METHODS: With respective approvals from institutional review boards, we compiled CT imaging and radiation dose data from four hospitals belonging to four countries (Brazil, Iran, Italy, and USA) on 400 adult patients who underwent chest CT for suspected or known COVID-19 pneumonia between April 2020 and August 2020. We recorded patient demographics and volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP). From thin-section CT images of each patient, we estimated the scan length and recorded the first and last vertebral bodies at the scan start and end locations. Patient mis-centering and arm position were recorded. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The extent and frequency of patient mis-centering did not differ across the four CT facilities (>0.09). The frequency of patients scanned with arms by their side (11-40% relative to those with arms up) had greater mis-centering and higher CTDIvol and DLP at 2/4 facilities (p = 0.027-0.05). Despite lack of variations in effective diameters (p = 0.14), there were significantly variations in scan lengths, CTDIvol and DLP across the four facilities (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mis-centering, over-scanning, and arms by the side are frequent issues with use of chest CT in COVID-19 pneumonia and are associated with higher radiation doses.

CHEST CT USAGE IN COVID-19 PNEUMONIA: MULTICENTER STUDY ON RADIATION DOSES AND DIAGNOSTIC QUALITY IN BRAZIL.

We assessed variations in chest CT usage, radiation dose and image quality in COVID-19 pneumonia. Our study included all chest CT exams performed in 533 patients from 6 healthcare sites from Brazil. We recorded patients' age, gender and body weight and the information number of CT exams per patient, scan parameters and radiation doses (volume CT dose index-CTDIvol and dose length product-DLP). Six radiologists assessed all chest CT exams for the type of pulmonary findings and classified CT appearance of COVID-19 pneumonia as typical, indeterminate, atypical or negative. In addition, each CT was assessed for diagnostic quality (optimal or suboptimal) and presence of artefacts. Artefacts were frequent (367/841), often related to respiratory motion (344/367 chest CT exams with artefacts) and resulted in suboptimal evaluation in mid-to-lower lungs (176/344) or the entire lung (31/344). There were substantial differences in CT usage, patient weight, CTDIvol and DLP across the participating sites.

Worldwide Diagnostic Reference Levels for Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: Findings From INCAPS.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to establish worldwide and regional diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and achievable administered activities (AAAs) for single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). BACKGROUND: Reference levels serve as radiation dose benchmarks to compare individual laboratories against aggregated data, helping to identify sites in greatest need of dose reduction interventions. DRLs for SPECT MPI have previously been derived from national or regional registries. To date there have been no multiregional reports of DRLs for SPECT MPI from a single standardized dataset. METHODS: Data were submitted voluntarily to the INCAPS (International Atomic Energy Agency Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Study), a cross-sectional, multinational registry of MPI protocols. A total of 7,103 studies were included. DRLs and AAAs were calculated by protocol for each world region and for aggregated worldwide data. RESULTS: The aggregated worldwide DRLs for rest-stress or stress-rest studies employing technetium Tc 99m-labeled radiopharmaceuticals were 11.2 mCi (first dose) and 32.0 mCi (second dose) for 1-day protocols, and 23.0 mCi (first dose) and 24.0 mCi (second dose) for multiday protocols. Corresponding AAAs were 10.1 mCi (first dose) and 28.0 mCi (second dose) for 1-day protocols, and 17.8 mCi (first dose) and 18.7 mCi (second dose) for multiday protocols. For stress-only technetium Tc 99m studies, the worldwide DRL and AAA were 18.0 mCi and 12.5 mCi, respectively. Stress-first imaging was used in 26% to 92% of regional studies except in North America where it was used in just 7% of cases. Significant differences in DRLs and AAAs were observed between regions. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports reference levels for SPECT MPI for each major world region from one of the largest international registries of clinical MPI studies. Regional DRLs may be useful in establishing or revising guidelines or simply comparing individual laboratory protocols to regional trends. Organizations should continue to focus on establishing standardized reporting methods to improve the validity and comparability of regional DRLs.