Clinical benchmarking of a commercial software for skin dose estimation in cardiac, abdominal, and neurology interventional procedures.

BACKGROUND: Radiation exposure from interventional radiology (IR) could lead to potential risk of skin injury in patients. Several dose monitoring software like radiation dose monitor (RDM) were developed to estimate the patient skin dose (PSD) distribution in IR. PURPOSE: This study benchmarked the accuracy of RDM software in estimating PSD as compared to GafChromic film baseline in-vivo measurements on patients during cardiac, abdominal, and neurology IR procedures. METHODS: The prospective study conducted in four IR departments included 81 IR procedures (25 cardiac, 31 abdominal, and 25 neurology procedures) on three angiographic systems. PSD and field geometry were measured by placing GafChromic film under the patient's back. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the software estimation and film measurement results in terms of PSD and geometric accuracy. RESULTS: Median values of measured/calculated PSD were 1140/1005, 591/655.9, and 538/409.7 mGy for neurology, cardiac, and abdominal procedures, respectively. For all angiographic systems, the median (InterQuartile Range, IQR) difference between calculated and measured PSD was -10.2% (-21.8%-5.7%) for neurology, -4.5% (-19.5%-15.5%) for cardiac, and -21.9% (-38.7%--3.6%) for abdominal IR procedures. These differences were not significant for all procedures (p > 0.05). Discrepancies increased up to -82% in lower dose regions where the measurement uncertainties are higher. Regarding the geometric accuracy, RDM correctly reproduced the skin dose map and estimated PSD area dimensions closely matched those registered on films with a median (IQR) difference of 0 cm (-1-0.8 cm). CONCLUSIONS: RDM is proved to be a useful solution for the estimation of PSD and skin dose distribution during abdominal, cardiac and neurology IR procedures despite a geometry phantom which is not specific to the latter type of IR procedures.

Artificial Intelligence for Detecting Acute Fractures in Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department: Real-Life Performance of Three Commercial Algorithms.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Interpreting radiographs in emergency settings is stressful and a burden for radiologists. The main objective was to assess the performance of three commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for detecting acute peripheral fractures on radiographs in daily emergency practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiographs were collected from consecutive patients admitted for skeletal trauma at our emergency department over a period of 2 months. Three AI algorithms-SmartUrgence, Rayvolve, and BoneView-were used to analyze 13 body regions. Four musculoskeletal radiologists determined the ground truth from radiographs. The diagnostic performance of the three AI algorithms was calculated at the level of the radiography set. Accuracies, sensitivities, and specificities for each algorithm and two-by-two comparisons between algorithms were obtained. Analyses were performed for the whole population and for subgroups of interest (sex, age, body region). RESULTS: A total of 1210 patients were included (mean age 41.3 ± 18.5 years; 742 [61.3%] men), corresponding to 1500 radiography sets. The fracture prevalence among the radiography sets was 23.7% (356/1500). Accuracy was 90.1%, 71.0%, and 88.8% for SmartUrgence, Rayvolve, and BoneView, respectively; sensitivity 90.2%, 92.6%, and 91.3%, with specificity 92.5%, 70.4%, and 90.5%. Accuracy and specificity were significantly higher for SmartUrgence and BoneView than Rayvolve for the whole population (P < .0001) and for subgroups. The three algorithms did not differ in sensitivity (P = .27). For SmartUrgence, subgroups did not significantly differ in accuracy, specificity, or sensitivity. For Rayvolve, accuracy and specificity were significantly higher with age 27-36 than ≥53 years (P = .0029 and P = .0019). Specificity was higher for the subgroup knee than foot (P = .0149). For BoneView, accuracy was significantly higher for the subgroups knee than foot (P = .0006) and knee than wrist/hand (P = .0228). Specificity was significantly higher for the subgroups knee than foot (P = .0003) and ankle than foot (P = .0195). CONCLUSION: The performance of AI detection of acute peripheral fractures in daily radiological practice in an emergency department was good to high and was related to the AI algorithm, patient age, and body region examined.

Establishing a priori and a posteriori predictive models to assess patients' peak skin dose in interventional cardiology. Part 2: results of the VERIDIC project.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing patient exposure in interventional cardiology is key to avoid skin injuries. PURPOSE: To establish predictive models of peak skin dose (PSD) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (CTO), and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 534 PCI, 219 CTO, and 209 TAVI were collected from 12 hospitals in eight European countries. Independent associations between PSD and clinical and technical dose determinants were examined for those procedures using multivariate statistical analysis. A priori and a posteriori predictive models were built using stepwise multiple linear regressions. A fourfold cross-validation was performed, and models' performance was evaluated using the root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), coefficient of determination (R²), and linear correlation coefficient (r). RESULTS: Multivariate analysis proved technical parameters to overweight clinical complexity indices with PSD mainly affected by fluoroscopy time, tube voltage, tube current, distance to detector, and tube angulation for PCI. For CTO, these were body mass index, tube voltage, and fluoroscopy contribution. For TAVI, these parameters were sex, fluoroscopy time, tube voltage, and cine acquisitions. When benchmarking the predictive models, the correlation coefficients were r = 0.45 for the a priori model and r = 0.89 for the a posteriori model for PCI. These were 0.44 and 0.67, respectively, for the CTO a priori and a posteriori models, and 0.58 and 0.74, respectively, for the TAVI a priori and a posteriori models. CONCLUSION: A priori predictive models can help operators estimate the PSD before performing the intervention while a posteriori models are more accurate estimates and can be useful in the absence of skin dose mapping solutions.

Patient exposure dose in interventional cardiology per clinical and technical complexity levels. Part 1: results of the VERIDIC project.

BACKGROUND: Patients can be exposed to high skin doses during complex interventional cardiology (IC) procedures. PURPOSE: To identify which clinical and technical parameters affect patient exposure and peak skin dose (PSD) and to establish dose reference levels (DRL) per clinical complexity level in IC procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Validation and Estimation of Radiation skin Dose in Interventional Cardiology (VERIDIC) project analyzed prospectively collected patient data from eight European countries and 12 hospitals where percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), chronic total occlusion PCI (CTO), and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedures were performed. A total of 62 clinical complexity parameters and 31 technical parameters were collected, univariate regressions were performed to identify those parameters affecting patient exposure and define DRL accordingly. RESULTS: Patient exposure as well as clinical and technical parameters were collected for a total of 534 PCI, 219 CTO, and 209 TAVI. For PCI procedures, body mass index (BMI), number of stents ≥2, and total stent length >28 mm were the most prominent clinical parameters, which increased the PSD value. For CTO, these were total stent length >57 mm, BMI, and previous anterograde or retrograde technique that failed in the same session. For TAVI, these were male sex, BMI, and number of diseased vessels. DRL values for Kerma-area product (PKA), air kerma at patient entrance reference point (Ka,r), fluoroscopy time (FT), and PSD were stratified, respectively, for 14 clinical parameters in PCI, 10 in CTO, and four in TAVI. CONCLUSION: Prior knowledge of the key factors influencing the PSD will help optimize patient radiation protection in IC.

Cumulative Radiation Exposure in Covid-19 Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit.

Medical imaging plays a major role in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patient diagnosis and management. However, the radiation dose received from medical procedures by these patients has been poorly investigated. We aimed to estimate the cumulative effective dose (CED) related to medical exposure in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in comparison to the usual critically ill patients. We designed a descriptive cohort study including 90 successive ICU COVID-19 patients admitted between March and May 2020 and 90 successive non-COVID-19 patients admitted between March and May 2019. In this study, the CED resulting from all radiological examinations was calculated and clinical characteristics predictive of higher exposure risk identified. The number of radiological examinations was 12.0 (5.0-26.0) [median (interquartile range) in COVID-19 vs. 4.0 (2.0-8.0) in non-COVID-19 patient (P < 0.001)]. The CED during a four-month period was 4.2 mSv (1.9-11.2) in the COVID-19 vs. 1.2 mSv (0.13-6.19) in the non-COVID-19 patients (P < 0.001). In the survivors, the CED in COVID-19 vs. non-COVID-19 patients was ≥100 mSv in 3% vs. 0%, 10-100 mSv in 23% vs. 15%, 1-10 mSv in 56% vs. 30% and <1 mSv in 18% vs. 55%. The CED (P < 0.001) and CED per ICU hospitalization day (P = 0.004) were significantly higher in COVID-19 than non-COVID-19 patients. The CED correlated significantly with the hospitalization duration (r = 0.45, P < 0.001) and the number of conventional radiological examinations (r = 0.8, P < 0.001). To conclude, more radiological examinations were performed in critically ill COVID-19 patients than non-COVID-19 patients resulting in higher CED. In COVID-19 patients, contribution of strategies to limit CED should be investigated in the future.

Diagnostic reference levels during fluoroscopically guided interventions using mobile C-arms in operating rooms: A national multicentric survey.

PURPOSE: To establish diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and achievable levels (ALs) for the most common fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGIs) performed in operating rooms using mobile C-arm equipment. METHODS: A national survey was performed in 57 centers in France. Anonymous data from 6817 patients undergoing FGIs were prospectively collected over a period of 7 months. DRLs (third quartile of the distribution) and ALs (median of the distribution) were determined for each type of intervention in terms of kerma area product (KAP) and fluoroscopy time (FT). RESULTS: DRLs and ALs were proposed for 31 procedure types related to seven surgical specialties: orthopedics (n = 9), urology (n = 3), vascular (n = 6), cardiology (n = 5), neurosurgery (n = 3), gastrointestinal (n = 3), and multi-specialty (n = 2). DRLs in terms of KAP ranged from 0.1 Gy·cm2 for hallux valgus to 78 Gy·cm2 for abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular repair. A factor of 155 was obtained between the FTs for a herniated lumbar disk (0.2 min) and an abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular repair (31 min). The highest variations were obtained within orthopedic procedures in terms of KAP (ratio 122) and within gastrointestinal procedures in terms of FT (ratio 9). Overall, the FGIs associated with the highest radiation exposure (KAP > 10 Gy·cm2) were found in the cardiology, vascular, and gastrointestinal specialties. CONCLUSIONS: DRLs and ALs are suggested for a wide range of FGIs performed in operating rooms using a mobile C-arm. We aim at providing a practical optimization tool for medical physicists and surgeons.

Benchmarking the DACS-integrated Radiation Dose Monitor® skin dose mapping software using XR-RV3 Gafchromic® films.

PURPOSE: To perform a benchmark of a new DACS-integrated patient skin dose mapping solution using on-phantom measurements with Gafchromic® films. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To calculate cumulative patient skin dose distribution with 1-cm2 resolution, a Radiation Dose Monitor (RDM, Medsquare), using the Radiation Dose Structured Report (RDSR), tabulated backscatter and mass energy absorption coefficients together with site-specific corrections for table, mattress attenuation, and air kerma calibration factor. Peak skin dose (PSD) and two-dimensional (2D) skin dose distributions calculated with RDM were compared against on-phantom measurements with XR-RV3 Gafchromic® films considering two widely used x-ray equipment. Seventeen different settings which include simple and multiple beam projections with extreme angulations (up to 75°), all available fields-of-view (FOVs 48-11 cm), additional collimation, variable table height and lateral positions, and variable phantom thickness (12, 20, and 30 cm) were involved. RESULTS: Due to a careful calibration of films using clinical beam qualities, 22.8% (k = 2) overall measurement uncertainty was achieved. Calculated and measured PSD values agreed with an average difference of 10% ± 7% and 9% ± 7% for 34 test conditions performed on Siemens Artis Zee and GEMS Innova IGS interventional systems, respectively. Finally, RDM's 2D skin dose maps closely matched those registered on XR-RV3 films considering the 1-cm2 resolution. While RDM correctly reproduced beam overlapping due to variable tube projections, FOV, table positions, etc., few challenges were identified related to conversion of rectangular fields to square areas in the RDSR and a stair-step effect visible for large tube projections (>45°). CONCLUSION: The accuracy of RDM's DACS-integrated skin dose mapping software was acceptable considering measurement uncertainties associated with Gafchromic® films.

Quality control in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) EFOMP-ESTRO-IAEA protocol (summary report).

The aim of the guideline presented in this article is to unify the test parameters for image quality evaluation and radiation output in all types of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) systems. The applications of CBCT spread over dental and interventional radiology, guided surgery and radiotherapy. The chosen tests provide the means to objectively evaluate the performance and monitor the constancy of the imaging chain. Experience from all involved associations has been collected to achieve a consensus that is rigorous and helpful for the practice. The guideline recommends to assess image quality in terms of uniformity, geometrical precision, voxel density values (or Hounsfield units where available), noise, low contrast resolution and spatial resolution measurements. These tests usually require the use of a phantom and evaluation software. Radiation output can be determined with a kerma-area product meter attached to the tube case. Alternatively, a solid state dosimeter attached to the flat panel and a simple geometric relationship can be used to calculate the dose to the isocentre. Summary tables including action levels and recommended frequencies for each test, as well as relevant references, are provided. If the radiation output or image quality deviates from expected values, or exceeds documented action levels for a given system, a more in depth system analysis (using conventional tests) and corrective maintenance work may be required.