Please enter verification code
Confirm
The Relationship of CT Mean Modulated Dose-Length Product and Body Mass Index During Routine 18F- FDG PET/CT Studies
International Journal of Medical Imaging
Volume 3, Issue 5, September 2015, Pages: 94-97
Received: Oct. 11, 2014; Accepted: Oct. 29, 2014; Published: Aug. 7, 2015
Views 5212      Downloads 144
Author
Simon Atkins, The Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College Hospital London, London, NW1 2BU, UK; Epworth Radiation Oncology, Epworth Healthcare, Richmond, VIC 3121, Australia
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
AIM: To determine the relationship of body mass index (BMI) on the mean dose length product (DLP) values acquired using modulated (automatic exposure control) and standard computed tomography (CT) scanning protocols as part of a typical 18F-FDG PET/CT study. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed and the dose-length product and BMI values from routine 18F-FDG PET/CT scans of 51 patients were recorded. The scans were performed on a 16-slice PET/CT scanner by using an automatic exposure control (AEC) system. DLP, BMI, age, sex and number of bed positions were documented for each patient. RESULTS: Twenty-four women and 27 men were included in the study (mean age, 52.5 years). The mean BMI was 24.76 kg/m2. The mean modulated DLP was 528.25 mGy/cm. Patients were grouped according to BMI (normal: BMI <25, overweight: BMI 25 – 30, obese: BMI >30) and age (≤18 years, 19 – 59 years, ≥ 60 years). The mean modulated DLP decreased by 22.77% for patients in the normal BMI group (P < 0.001). The obese group of patient’s mean modulated DLP was 26.29% higher (P < 0.01). The DLP decreased by 22.43% for patients aged 60 years and above compared with patients in the 19 – 59 age group. CONCLUSION: The use of modulated scanning protocol significantly reduces the integrated dose received from a whole body CT scan for patients with a BMI < 25. Increasing patient size (BMI >25) significantly increases the integrated dose received. The possible change in body composition with age may also indicate a reduction in dose received from a whole body CT scan using AEC.
Keywords
Dose-Length Product, Body Mass Index, Automatic Exposure Control
To cite this article
Simon Atkins, The Relationship of CT Mean Modulated Dose-Length Product and Body Mass Index During Routine 18F- FDG PET/CT Studies, International Journal of Medical Imaging. Vol. 3, No. 5, 2015, pp. 94-97. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmi.20150305.12
References
[1]
ICRP, ICRP Publication 103, “Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection”, Amsterdam (NLD), Elsevier, 2007.
[2]
NHS England Analytical Services (Operations) 2014, NHS Imaging and Radiodiagnostic activity (2013/14), NHS England, Available from: . [11 October 2014].
[3]
P.C. Shrimpton, M.C. Hillier, M.A. Lewis and M. Dunn, “National Survey of Doses from CT in the UK: 2003,” British Journal of Radiology, Vol. 79, Issue. 948, pp. 968-980, April 2006.
[4]
P.D. Deak, O. Langner, M. Lell and W. Kalender, “Effects of Adaptive Section Collimation on Patient Radiation Dose in Multisection Spiral CT,” Radiology, Vol. 252: No. 1, pp. 140-147, July 2009.
[5]
A.B Gonzalez and S. Darby, “Risk of cancer from diagnostic x-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries,” Lancet, Vol. 363, Issue. 9406, pp. 345-51, January 2004.
[6]
World Health Organisation, Global Database on Body Mass Index 2014, Available from: < http://www.who.int/en/>. [March 2014].
[7]
M. Lewis, “ImpactScan course notes: Principles of CT Dosimetry 2002,” Available from: , [March 2014]
[8]
GE Healthcare, “A Guide to CT Radiation Dose Management 2012,” Available from: , [March 2014].
[9]
W. Huda, K. M. Ogden and M. R. Khorasani, “Converting Dose-Length Product to Effective Dose at CT,” Radiology, Vol. 248: No.3, pp.995-1003, September 2008.
[10]
D. Platten, “ImpactScan course notes: Multi-slice helical CT physics and technology,” Available from: , [March 2014].
[11]
Manowitz A, Sedlar M, Griffon M, Miller A, Miller J, Markowitz S. “Use of BMI guidelines and individual dose tracking to minimize radiation exposure from low-dose helical chest CT scanning in a lung cancer screening program,” Academic radiology, Vol 19, Issue 1, pp. 84-8, January 2012.
[12]
Chan V.O, McDermott S, Buckley O, Allen S, Casey M, O’Laoide R and Torreggiani W.C. “The relationship of body mass index and abdominal fat on the radiation dose received during routine computed tomographic imaging of the abdomen and pelvis,” Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, Vol. 63, Issue 4, pp. 260-266, November 2012.
[13]
Odedra D, Blobel J, AlHumayyd S, Durand M, Jimenez-Juan L, Paul N. “Image noise-based dose adaptation in dynamic volume CT of the heart: dose and image quality optimisation in comparison with BMI-based dose adaptation,” European radiology, Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 86-94, January 2014.
[14]
World Health Organisation (WHO), Technical Report Series 894, ‘Obesity: Preventing and Managing the Global Epidemic,” WHO, Singapore, 2000.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186