2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07652-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CT diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications: results of a large-scale European survey

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
25
1
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
25
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Compared with recently published results from the large-scale, survey-based EUCLID study on standard-sized patients, most DRLs from the UCSF CT International Dose Registry, which includes all patient sizes, were higher than DRLs from the EUCLID study, except for stroke and lung cancer [21].…”
contrasting
confidence: 80%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Compared with recently published results from the large-scale, survey-based EUCLID study on standard-sized patients, most DRLs from the UCSF CT International Dose Registry, which includes all patient sizes, were higher than DRLs from the EUCLID study, except for stroke and lung cancer [21].…”
contrasting
confidence: 80%
“…Larger surveys are necessary to account for variations based on size and variations that may result from inclusion of a single or small number of scanners [25]. The recently published EUCLID study is also based on a large-scale survey that collected at least 20 CT examinations of standard-sized patients from each hospital for each EUCLID indication [21]. The differences in the DRLs of the UCSF CT International Dose Registry and this study may be mainly attributable to the inclusion of all patients and all CT scans in the registry rather than only selected patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, the exposure can vary for a repeated assessment of ventricular size in a chronic condition of ventriculoperitoneal shunt presence versus level 1 trauma head CT although the RadLex® Playbook identifier mapping for both would be the same. Indication-based DRLs for CT, such as those that have been investigated in Europe (33,34), would be of value. Indication-based DRLs would result in dose being adjusted according to clinical indication for the same anatomic region, and the concept of "one dose fits all" would not apply.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Decisions based on cumulative effective dose, and attendant real or potential small biological risks should also consider the far greater cumulative benefit. The influence of the regional practice on CED should also be considered as there are radiation exposure differences for the same clinical context [5,6] making a fixed CED reference value challenging. The CED paradigm suffers too from the significance of regional anatomic risks from the same 100-mSv "alert", such as from recurrent brain versus abdomen pelvis CT examinations.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%