Published April 2012 | Version v1
Journal article

Radiation doses from phantom measurements at high-pitch dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography

  • 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, CH-8091 Zurich (Switzerland)
  • 2. Institute of Radiology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Rorschacherstrasse 95, CH-9007 St. Gallen (Switzerland)
  • 3. Division for Radiation Safety and Security, Paul Scherrer Institut, CH-5232 Villigen (Switzerland)
  • 4. Division of Cardiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, CH-8091 Zurich (Switzerland)
  • 5. Cardiac MR PET CT Program, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 165 Cambridge St, Boston, MA 02114 (United States)

Description

Objective: To compare radiation doses delivered at prospectively ECG-triggered sequential- (SEQ), retrospectively ECG-gated spiral- (RETRO) and prospectively ECG-triggered high-pitch spiral- (HP) computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) protocols, as well as catheter coronary angiography (CCA) using an anthropomorphic phantom. Materials and methods: An anthropomorphic Alderson phantom equipped with 50 thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) was scanned using different CTCA protocols and an uncomplicated diagnostic CCA examination was simulated. Absorbed doses were experimentally determined and effective doses calculated using the dose-length product (DLP) for CTCA and the dose-area product (DAP) for CCA, as well as according to International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) publications 60 and 103. Results: Effective organ doses were significantly lower for HP protocols (100 kV: 0.17 ± 0.26 mSv; 120 kV: 0.26 ± 0.39 mSv) compared to SEQ protocols (100 kV: 0.50 ± 0.79 mSv; 120 kV: 0.90 ± 1.41 mSv; each p < 0.05) and compared to RETRO protocols (100 kV: 1.59 ± 2.12 mSv; 120 kV: 2.75 ± 3.50 mSv; each p < 0.05). Effective organ doses at HP-CTCA tended to be lower than at CCA (0.37 ± 0.40 mSv), however this was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). Effective doses calculated according to ICRP guidelines could be estimated using the DLP and a conversion coefficient of k = 0.034 mSv/[mGy cm] (ICRP103) or k = 0.028 mSv/[mGy cm] (ICRP60), respectively. HP-CTCA led to a dose reduction of 89% compared to RETRO-CTCA, regardless of the calculation method used. Conclusions: Radiation doses as determined by phantom measurements are significantly lower at HP-CTCA compared to SEQ-CTCA and RETRO-CTCA and comparable to uncomplicated diagnostic CCA.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.068

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.068;
PII
S0720-048X(11)00107-0;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
European Journal of Radiology
Journal Volume
81
Journal Issue
4
Journal Page Range
p. 773-779
ISSN
0720-048X
CODEN
EJRADR

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2011 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.