DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Size-Specific Dose Estimation In the Korean Lung Cancer Screening Project: Does a 32-cm Diameter Phantom Represent a Standard-Sized Patient in Korean Population?

  • Kim, Eun Young (Department of Radiology, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Tae Jung (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Goo, Jin Mo (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hyae Young (Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center) ;
  • Lee, Ji Won (Department of Radiology, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Medical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Soojung (Department of Radiology, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Lim, Jun-tae (Cancer Early Detection Branch, National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center) ;
  • Kim, Yeol (Cancer Early Detection Branch, National Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center)
  • 투고 : 2018.04.09
  • 심사 : 2018.06.09
  • 발행 : 2018.12.01

초록

Objective: The purposes of this study were to evaluate size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) of low-dose CT (LDCT) in the Korean Lung Cancer Screening (K-LUCAS) project and to determine whether CT protocols from Western countries are appropriate for lung cancer screening in Korea. Materials and Methods: For participants (n = 256, four institutions) of K-LUCAS pilot study, volume CT dose index ($CTDI_{vol}$) using a 32-cm diameter reference phantom was compared with SSDE, which was recalculated from $CTDI_{vol}$ using size-dependent conversion factor (f-size) based on the body size, as described in the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204. This comparison was subsequently assessed by body mass index (BMI) levels (underweight/normal vs. overweight/obese), and automatic exposure control (AEC) adaptation (yes/no). Results: Size-specific dose estimate was higher than $CTDI_{vol}$ ($2.22{\pm}0.75mGy$ vs. $1.67{\pm}0.60mGy$, p < 0.001), since the f-size was larger than 1.0 for all participants. The ratio of SSDE to $CTDI_{vol}$ was higher in lower BMI groups; 1.26, 1.37, 1.43, and 1.53 in the obese (n = 103), overweight (n = 70), normal (n = 75), and underweight (n = 4), respectively. The ratio of SSDE to $CTDI_{vol}$ was greater in standard-sized participants than in large-sized participants independent of AEC adaptation; with AEC, SSDE/$CTDI_{vol}$ in large- vs. standard-sized participants: $1.30{\pm}0.08$ vs. $1.44{\pm}0.08$ (p < 0.001) and without AEC, $1.32{\pm}0.08$ vs. $1.42{\pm}0.06$ (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Volume CT dose index based on a reference phantom underestimates radiation exposure of LDCT in standard-sized Korean participants. The optimal radiation dose limit needs to be verified for standard-sized Korean participants.

키워드

과제정보

연구 과제 주관 기관 : Ministry for Health and Welfare, National Cancer Center

참고문헌

  1. Kramer BS, Berg CD, Aberle DR, Prorok PC. Lung cancer screening with low-dose helical CT: results from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). J Med Screen 2011;18:109-111 https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2011.011055
  2. Lee JW, Kim HY, Goo JM, Kim EY, Lee SJ, Kim TJ, et al. Radiological report of pilot study for the Korean Lung Cancer Screening (K-LUCAS) project: feasibility of implementing lung imaging reporting and data system. Korean J Radiol 2018;19:803-808 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.4.803
  3. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002;22:1541-1553 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.226025128
  4. WHO Expert Consultation. Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies. Lancet 2004;363:157-163 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)15268-3
  5. Larke FJ, Kruger RL, Cagnon CH, Flynn MJ, McNitt-Gray MM, Wu X, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with lowdose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:1165-1169 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.6533
  6. Aberle DR, Gamsu G, Henschke CI, Naidich DP, Swensen SJ. A consensus statement of the Society of Thoracic Radiology: screening for lung cancer with helical computed tomography. J Thorac Imaging 2001;16:65-68 https://doi.org/10.1097/00005382-200101000-00010
  7. AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee. The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT (Report No. 96). College Park, MD: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008
  8. AAPM Task Group 204. Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. College Park, MD: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008
  9. McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Cody DD, Boone JM, McNitt-Gray MF. CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology 2011;259:311-316 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101800
  10. Christner JA, Braun NN, Jacobsen MC, Carter RE, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Size-specific dose estimates for adult patients at CT of the torso. Radiology 2012;265:841-847 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12112365
  11. Israel GM, Cicchiello L, Brink J, Huda W. Patient size and radiation exposure in thoracic, pelvic, and abdominal CT examinations performed with automatic exposure control. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:1342-1346 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3331
  12. Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, Ghysen D, Van Dijck X, Mussen E, et al. Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 2005;237:213-223 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2363041220

피인용 문헌

  1. Rise of the Visible Monkey: Sectioned Images of Rhesus Monkey vol.34, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e66
  2. Characteristics of Recent Articles Published in the Korean Journal of Radiology Based on the Citation Frequency vol.21, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2020.1322
  3. Coronary artery calcium severity grading on non-ECG-gated low-dose chest computed tomography: a multiple-observer study in a nationwide lung cancer screening registry vol.30, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06707-x
  4. Association of Radiation Doses and Cancer Risks from CT Pulmonary Angiography Examinations in Relation to Body Diameter vol.10, pp.9, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10090681
  5. Radiation Dose from Computed Tomography Scans for Korean Pediatric and Adult Patients vol.46, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14407/jrpr.2021.00010