Appropriate Image Quality of Computed Tomography Examinations: What Is "Appropriate" & How Can It Be Reproducibly Achieved?

Congress:

EuroSafe Imaging 2016

Poster Number:

ESI-0052

Type:

EuroSafe Imaging

Keywords:

Action 7 - Medical radiation protection research: MELODI, EURAMED, Action 6 - Education and training in medical radiation protection, Action 3 - Optimisation, diagnostic reference levels, image quality, Action 2 - Clinical diagnostic reference levels (DRLs), Action 8 - Radiation protection training and learning material, Action 9 - Facilitation of research in advanced topics of radiation protection

Authors:

W. Stiller, G. Pahn, A. Steuwe, J. Hansen, S. Skornitzke, H. U. Kauczor

DOI:

10.1594/esi2016/ESI-0052

DOI-Link:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1594/esi2016/ESI-0052

Background/Introduction

Computed tomography (CT) constitutes a mainstay of present day radiological diagnostics. Through a number of technical innovations, the range of clinical applications of CT has been constantly extended, and new radiodiagnostic indications have become accessible. At the same time, this has also lead to an ever increasing contribution of CT examinations to the collective exposure of patients to ionizing radiation: In the year 2012, for example, 9 % of all diagnostic procedures requiring the use of ionizing radiation performed in Germany were CT examinations, contributing...

Description of activity and work performed

Objective measures of image quality are available [8, 9, 13]. Quantitative CT image quality metrics allow for standardized and reproducible quantitative image quality analysis, e.g. for routine quality assurance (QA), inspection of image quality discrepancies between different scanner models and acquisition protocols, and evaluation of new CT technology or reconstruction methods, cf. Fig. 4. However, despite being fully quantitative, experience shows that such objective measures of image quality cannot lay claim to a complete description of images in view of their diagnostic quality, i.e. with...

Conclusion and Recommendations

The image quality which is to be seen as the “minimum necessary” or, in the sense of radiation protection, as the “appropriate” image quality for a particular diagnostic task, must be ensured for all patients to be examined independent of their constitution, with minimum radiation exposure [5]. The definition of such diagnostic task-based “appropriate image quality” should be based on standardized quality criteria as set by the clinicians’ requirements of everyday clinical routine by subspecialty. To this end, the development of a questionnaire for the...

Personal/Organisational information

Dr. Wolfram Stiller, Dipl. Phys. Section Head "Physics & Methods" University Hospital Heidelberg Clinic for Diagnostic & Interventional Radiology (DIR) Im Neuenheimer Feld 110 69120 Heidelberg Germany

References

[1] Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (BfS). “Umweltradioaktivität und Strahlenbelastung. Jahresbericht 1997.” March 2000, pp. 215-229. [2] Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (BfS). “Umweltradioaktivität und Strahlenbelastung. Jahresbericht 2013.” July 2015, p. 108. [3] Hall, E. J.; and D. J. Brenner. “Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology.” British Journal of Radiology, Vol. 81, No. 965, May 2008, pp. 362-378. doi: 10.1259/bjr/01948454. [4] European Medical Associations representing Ionising Radiation Applications in Medicine (EANM, EFOMP, EFRS, ESR, ESTRO). “Common strategic research agenda for radiation protection in medicine.” European Alliance for Medical Radiation Protection...