Evaluation of Eye Lens Dose Reduction Technics in Head CT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/jbemi.86.11218Keywords:
Dose reduction technics, X-rays, Radiation induced cataract, Iterative reconstructionAbstract
The purpose of this study is to find the best protocol to reduce the X-ray dose to the eye lens during head diagnostic computed tomography (CT) without decreasing image quality in the organs of interest according to the type of scanner. The lens of the eye is one of radiosensitive tissues in the body. Radiation induced cataract has been demonstrated among staff involved in interventional procedures using X-rays. This study compares the absorbed dose and image quality of several dose reduction technics to the eye lens during head CT exam namely bismuth shielding, organ-based dose modulation, tube current modulation, tube voltage modulation and the combination of a number of these techniques. Compared to the reference scan (Fixed tube current without bismuth shielding), the dose to the eye lens was reduced by 29.91% with bismuth shield, 14.55% with tube current modulation, 37.76% with tube current modulation and bismuth shield. The combination of organ-based dose modulation with tube voltage modulation reduced the dose by 44.93% that of tube current modulation with tube voltage modulation reduced by 19.03% and that of tube current modulation with tube voltage modulation and shield by 46.73%.
The combination of organ-based dose with tube voltage modulation provided superior image quality than that of tube current modulation with tube voltage modulation and shield while similarly reducing dose to the eye lens.
References
K D Hopper, S H King, M E Lobell, T R TenHave, and J S Weaver. Radiology1997, 205:853-858.
DJ Brenner, CD Elliston, and WE Berdon. AJR 2001, 176:289-296.
N. Congdon, JR Vingerling, BE Klein, et al., Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122:487-94
U Moström, C Ytterbergh, and K Bergström. ActaRadiolDiagn (Stockh) 1986, 27:599-606.
K Nishizawa, T Maruyama, M Takayama, M Okada, J Hachiya, and Y Furuya. BrJ Radiol 1991, 64:20-28.
N. Kleinman, Euraton, Radiation protection 145, 2007; (Radiation cataract): 81-95
EA. Ainsbury, SD. Boufler, W. Dorr, J. Graw, CR. Murhead, AA. Edwards,J. Cooper, Radiation research 2009, 172(1): 1-9
G V Dalrymple, M E Goulden, G M Kollmorgen, and H Vogel. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 41, 1973.
A Martin and S Harbison. London: Science Paperbacks, 41, 1972.
B L Fricke, F L Donnelly, D P Frush, T Yoshizumi, V Varchena, S A Poe, and J Lucaya. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003, 180(2):407-411.
P.W. Frame. Health Phys, 2004, 87(2):111-35.
C Yu and G Luxton. Med.Phys; 1999, 26(6):0094-2405.
G. Voge. Analyse d'images avec ImageJ. Isle d'Abeau, France, 2008.
M.K. Kalra, M.M. Maher, T.L. Toth, B Schmidt, B.L. Westerman, H.T. Morgan, and S. Saini. Radiology 2004, 233:649-657.
ICRP, 1984, Non-stochastic effects of irradiation. ICRP Publication 41. Ann. ICRP 14(3).
ICRP, 1990, RBE for deterministic effects. ICRP Publication 58. Ann. ICRP 20(4).
ICRP, 1991a. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ann. ICRP 21(1-3).
ICRP, 2000, Radio pathology of skin and eye and radiation risk. ICRP Publication 85. Ann. ICRP 30(2).
ICRP, 2007, Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37(2-4).
N. Congdon, JR. Vingerling, BE.Klein et al. Arch Ophthamol 2004; 122: 487-94.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Thierry Narcisse Kouagou Bangassi, Odette Ngano Samba, Hubert Thierens, Moïse Godfroy Kwato Njock
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
