PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1806868
Original Article

Establishing Diagnostic Reference Level for Adult Abdomen and Pelvis CT Scans: A Benchmarking Study across BMI Groups

Jaseemudheen M. M. 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Nitte (Deemed to be university), K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Raghuraja U. 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Nitte (Deemed to be university), K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Sri Krishna U. 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Nitte (Deemed to be university), K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Lathika Shetty 
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, Nitte (Deemed to be university), K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Amita Dabholkar 
2   Department of Radiology and Imaging Technology, Dr. D. Y. Patil School of Allied Health Sciences, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Sant Tukaram Nagar, Pimpri, Pune
,
Chandana Ramachandraiah 
3   Department of MIT, A.J. Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
› Institutsangaben Funding None.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective This study aims to establish local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) abdomen and pelvis scans in adult patients within the Mangalore region, emphasizing variations in radiation dose metrics across body mass index (BMI) categories.

Materials and Methods A prospective multicenter study was conducted across five health care facilities and analyzed data from 500 patients (18–60 years) undergoing multiphase CECT abdomen and pelvis scans. CT dose descriptors, volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), and dose length product (DLP) were recorded separately for plain, arterial, and portovenous phases. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and correlation analyses assessed dose variations across BMI categories.

Results The 75th percentile CTDIvol and DLP values for the plain phase were 8.30 mGy and 460.50 mGy·cm, respectively. Significant variations in radiation dose indices were observed across BMI groups (p < 0.001). CTDIvol for the plain phase increased from 7.42 ± 1.41 mGy in underweight individuals to 8.41 ± 1.21 mGy in overweight individuals. Corresponding DLP values ranged from 400.00 to 450.55 mGy·cm.

Conclusion The study established DRLs at the 75th percentile, demonstrating lower radiation doses than national and international benchmarks. These results highlight the significance of optimizing doses according to BMI to improve patient safety and the quality of diagnoses.

Keywords

body mass index - diagnostic reference levels - dose descriptors - radiation dose optimization - multiphase CT

Data Availability Statement

The data sets used and/or analyzed during the current study are accessible from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.




Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
01. April 2025

© 2025. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Vañó E, Miller DL, Martin CJ. et al; Authors on behalf of ICRP. ICRP publication 135: diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging. Ann ICRP 2017; 46 (01) 1-144
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ, Berdon WE. Estimated Risks of Radiation-Induced Fatal Cancer from Pediatric CT [Internet]. AJR; 2001. Accessed March 13, 2025 at: www.ajronline.org
  • 3 Lee KL, Beveridge T, Sanagou M, Thomas P. Updated Australian diagnostic reference levels for adult CT. J Med Radiat Sci 2020; 67 (01) 5-15
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Foley SJ, McEntee MF, Rainford LA. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J Radiol 2012; 85 (1018): 1390-1397
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Erem G, Ameda F, Otike C. et al. Adult computed tomography examinations in Uganda: towards determining the national diagnostic reference levels. BMC Med Imaging 2022; 22 (01) 112
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Protection Radiation ECEC. N° 185. National Radiological Protection Board. [Internet]. 2018:1–117. Accessed March 13, 2025 at: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/rp_185.pdf
  • 7 Thomas P. National diagnostic reference levels: what they are, why we need them and what's next. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 66 (02) 208-214
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 A healthy lifestyle - WHO recommendations [Internet]. 2010. Accessed March 13, 2025 at: https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/fact-sheets/item/a-healthy-lifestyle—who-recommendations
  • 9 Santos J, Foley S, Paulo G, McEntee MF, Rainford L. The establishment of computed tomography diagnostic reference levels in Portugal. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2014; 158 (03) 307-317
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Saravanakumar A, Vaideki K, Govindarajan KN, Jayakumar S, Devanand B. Estimation of dose reference levels in computed tomography for select procedures in Kerala, India. J Med Phys 2015; 40 (02) 115-119
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Roch P, Célier D, Dessaud C, Etard C. Using diagnostic reference levels to evaluate the improvement of patient dose optimisation and the influence of recent technologies in radiography and computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 2018; 98: 68-74
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Varghese B, Kandanga I, Puthussery P. et al. Radiation dose metrics in multidetector computed tomography examinations: a multicentre retrospective study from seven tertiary care hospitals in Kerala, South India. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2018; 28 (02) 250-257
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Sohrabi M, Parsi M, Mianji F. Determination of national diagnostic reference levels in computed tomography examinations of Iran by a new quality control-based dose survey method. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2018; 179 (03) 206-215
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Matsunaga Y, Chida K, Kondo Y. et al. Diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for common computed tomography examinations: results from the Japanese nationwide dose survey. Br J Radiol 2019; 92 (1094): 20180290
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Kumsa MJ, Nguse TM, Ambessa HB, Gele TT, Fantaye WG, Dellie ST. Establishment of local diagnostic reference levels for common adult CT examinations: a multicenter survey in Addis Ababa. BMC Med Imaging 2023; 23 (01) 6
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kahraman G, Haberal KM, Ağıldere AM. Establishment of local diagnostic reference levels for computed tomography with cloud-based automated dose-tracking software in Türkiye. Diagn Interv Radiol 2024; 30 (03) 205-211
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Inoue Y, Itoh H, Nagahara K, Hata H, Mitsui K. Relationships of radiation dose indices with body size indices in adult body computed tomography. Tomography 2023; 9 (04) 1381-1392
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Yu L, Liu X, Leng S. et al. Radiation dose reduction in computed tomography: techniques and future perspective. Imaging Med 2009; 1 (01) 65-84
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar