Temporal Trends in Radiation Dose Associated with Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography

Paolo Marraccini, Alessandro Mazzarisi, Clara Carpeggiani, Mathis Schluter, Marco Brambilla, Massimiliano Bianchi, Lorenzo Faggioni, Giuseppe Coppini, Carlo Bartolozzi, Eugenio Picano

Clinical Institute of Physiology, CNR, Pisa, Italy.
CNR Tuscany Region G Monasterio Foundation, Pisa, Italy.
Department of Radiology, Pisa University, Pisa, Italy.
Health Physics Unit, Ospedale Maggiore, Novara, Italy.

DOI: 10.4236/ojrad.2014.41013                

Abstract

Background: In 2010, the International Atomic Energy Agency launched the “3A’s campaign” as an effective tool for primary cancer prevention. In 2011, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine recommended the size specific dose estimate (SSDE). Objectives: To audit doses of Coronary CT Angiography (Coronary CTA) in tertiary care referral center. Methods: We reviewed 998 consecutive Coronary CTA (from 2007 to 2012). Doses (CTDIvol mGy), DLP (mGy*cm), effective dose (DLP*0.014, mSv) were on-line archived. SSDE was estimated retrospectively. Appropriateness score was evaluated for exams performed from the 2010. Results: Overall median dose per Coronary CTA was 49.7 mGy for CTDIvol, 55.5 mGy for SSDE, 994.96 mGy*cm for DLP, 13.9 mSv for effective dose. Median DLP decreased over time (1452.94 in 2007, 1605.56 in 2008, 1113.49 in 2009, 759.99 in 2010, 448.61 in 2011 and 497.88 mGy*cm in 2012, p < 0.0001). SSDE was proportional to the size dependent factor (SDF); in patients with SDF > 1 (88%) CTDIvol underestimated SSDE (48.49 vs 57.19 mGy), whilst in patients with SDF < 1 (12%) CTDIvol overestimated SSDE (56.46 vs 50.3 mGy). Scans were appropriate in 58%, uncertain in 24%, and inappropriate in 18% of cases. Doses were similar in appropriate, uncertain or inappropriate examinations and in excellent-to-good (81%) vs. sufficient-to-poor (19%) image quality exams. Conclusions: Coronary CTA reference doses can be very misleading. SSDE can allow individual technique optimization. The dose is similar in appropriate and inappropriate examinations, and unrelated to image quality. The rate of inappropriate examinations is still too high even after dissemination of guidelines.

Keywords

Ischemic Heart Disease; X Ray; Cardiac Computed Tomography; Cardiovascular Imaging; Radiation Dosing

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Picano, E. (2004) Sustainability of Medical Imaging. Education and Debate. BMJ, 328, 578-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7439.578
[2]	Mettler Jr., F.A., Thomadsen, B.R., Bhargavan, M., Gilley, D.B., Gray, J.E., Lipoti, J.A., McCrohan, J., Yoshizumi, T.T. and Mahesh, M. (2008) Medical Radiation Exposure in the U.S. in 2006: Preliminary Results. Health Physics, 95, 502-507. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.HP.0000326333.42287.a2
[3]	Cone, M. (2010) President’s Cancer Panel: Environmentally Caused Cancers Are “Grossly Underestimated” and “Needlessly Devastate American Lives”. Environmental Health News. http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/presidents-cancer-panel
[4]	Malone, J., Guleria, R., Craven, C., Horton, P., Jarvinen, H., Mayo, J., O’reilly, G., Picano, E., Remedios, D., Le Heron, J., Rehani, M., Holmberg, O. and Czarwinski, R. (2012) Justification of Diagnostic Medical Exposures: Some Practical Issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation. British Journal of Radiology, 85, 523-538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/42893576
[5]	Einstein, A.J., Henzlova, M.J. and Rajagopalan, S. (2007) Estimating Risk of Cancer Associated with Radiation Exposure from 64-Slice Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography. JAMA, 298, 317-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.3.317
[6]	Smith-Bindman, R., Lipson, J., Marcus, R., Kim, K.P., Mahesh, M., Gould, R., Berrington de González, A. and Miglioretti, D.L. (2009) Radiation Dose Associated with Common Computed Tomography Examinations and the Associated Lifetime Attributable Risk of Cancer. Archives of Internal Medicine, 169, 2078-2086. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.427
[7]	Bedetti, G., Botto, N., Andreassi, M.G., Traino, C., Vano, E. and Picano, E. (2008) Cumulative Patient Effective Dose in Cardiology. British Journal of Radiology, 81, 699-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/29507259
[8]	Ait-Ali, L., Andreassi, M.G., Foffa, I., Spadoni, I., Vano, E. and Picano, E. (2010) Cumulative Patient Effective Dose and Acute Radiation-Induced Chromosomal DNA Damage in Children with Congenital Heart Disease. Heart, 96, 269-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2008.160309
[9]	Center for Devices and Radiological Health US Food and Drug Administration (2010) White Paper: Initiative to Reduce Unnecessary Radiation Exposure from Medical Imaging. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationSafety/RadiationDoseReduction/ucm199994.htm
[10]	Gerber, T.C., Carr, J.J., Arai, A.E., Dixon, R.L., Ferrari, V.A., Gomes, A.S., Heller, G.V., McCollough, C.H., McNittGray, M.F., Mettler, F.A., Mieres, J.H., Morin, R.L. and Yester, M.V. (2009) Ionizing Radiation in Cardiac Imaging: A Science Advisory from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiac Imaging of the Council on Clinical Cardiology and Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention. Circulation, 119, 1056-1065. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.191650
[11]	Brindis, R. and Douglas, P.S. (2010) President’s Page: The ACC Encourages Multi-Pronged Approach to Radiation Safety. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 56, 522-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.001
[12]	Amis Jr., E.S., Butler, P.F., Applegate, K.E., et al. (2007) American College of Radiology. American College of Radiology White Paper on Radiation Dose in Medicine. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 4, 272-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2007.03.002
[13]	Taylor, A.J., Cerqueira, M., Hodgson, J.M., Mark, D., Min, J., O’Gara, P., Rubin, G.D., American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force; Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography; American College of Radiology; American Heart Association; American Society of Echocardiography; American Society of Nuclear Cardiology; North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging; Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Kramer, C.M., Berman, D., Brown, A., Chaudhry, F.A., Cury, R.C., Desai, M.Y., Einstein, A.J., Gomes, A.S., Harrington, R., Hoffmann, U., Khare, R., Lesser, J., McGann, C., Rosenberg, A., Schwartz, R., Shelton, M., Smetana, G.W. and Smith Jr., S.C. (2010) ACCF/SCCT/ ACR/AHA/ASE/ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 Appropriate Use Criteria for Cardiac Computed Tomography: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 56, 1864-1894. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.005
[14]	American Association of Physicists in Medicine (2011) Size-Specific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in Pediatric and Adult Body CT Examinations: Report of AAPM Task Group 204. College Park.
[15]	Halliburton, S.S., Abbara, S., Chen, M.Y., et al. (2011) SCCT Guidelines on Radiation Dose and Dose-Optimization Strategies in Cardiovascular CT. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, 5, 198-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2011.06.001
[16]	International Commission on Radiological Protection (2007) The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP, Publication no. 103. http://www.icrp.org/publications.asp
[17]	Stolzmann, P., Goetti, R., Baumueller, S., Plass, A., Falk, V., Scheffel, H., Feuchtner, G., Marincek, B., Alkadhi, H. and Leschka, S. (2009) Prospective and Retrospective ECG-Gating for CT Coronary Angiography Perform Similarly Accurate at Low Heart Rates. European Journal of Radiology, 79, 85-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.12.016
[18]	European Commission. Directorate General Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection (2000) Radiation Protection 116 Guidelines on Education and Training in Radiation Protection for Medical Exposures. Luxembourg.
[19]	Raff, G.L., Chinnaiyan, K.M., Share, D.A., Goraya, T.Y., Kazerooni, E.A., Moscucci, M., Gentry, R.E. and Abidov, A. (2009) Advanced Cardiovascular Imaging Consortium Co-Investigators. Radiation Dose from Cardiac Computed Tomography before and after Implementation of Radiation Dose-Reduction Techniques. JAMA, 301, 2340-2348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.814
[20]	Brink, J.A. and Morin, R.L. (2012) Size-Specific Dose Estimation for CT: How Should It Be Used and What Does It Mean? Radiology, 265, 666-668. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12121919
[21]	Kocinaj, D., Cioppa, A., Ambrosini, G., Tesorio, T., Salemme, L., Sorropago, G., Rubino, P. and Picano, E. (2006) Radiation Dose Exposure during Cardiac and Peripheral Arteries Catheterisation. International Journal of Cardiology, 113, 283-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.09.035
[22]	Zorzetto, M., Bernardi, G., Morocutti, G. and Fontanelli, A. (1997) Radiation Exposure to Patients and Operators during Diagnostic Catheterization and Coronary Angioplasty. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis, 40, 348351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0304(199704)40:4<348::AID-CCD4>3.0.CO;2-9
[23]	Sabarudin, A., Sun, Z. and Nq, K.H. (2012) A Systematic Review of Radiation Dose Associated with Different Generations of Multidetector CT Coronary Angiography. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology, 56, 5-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02335.x
[24]	Ghoshhajra, B.B., Engel, L.C., Major, G.P., Goehler, A., Techasith, T., Verdini, D., Do, S., Liu, B., Li, X., Sala, M., Kim, M.S., Blankstein, R., Prakash, P., Sidhu, M.S., Corsini, E., Banerji, D., Wu, D., Abbara, S., Truong, Q., Brady, T.J., Hoffmann, U. and Kalra, M. (2012) Evolution of Coronary Computed Tomography Radiation Dose Reduction at a Tertiary Referral Center. American Journal of Medicine, 125, 764-772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.10.036
[25]	Chinnaiyan, K.M., Boura, J.A., Depetris, A., Gentry, R., Abidov, A., Share, D.A. and Raff, G.L. (2013) Progressive Radiation Dose Reduction from Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in a Statewide Collaborative Quality Improvement Program: Results from the Advanced Cardiovascular Imaging Consortium. Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, 6, 646-654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.112.000237
[26]	Ayyad, A.E., Cole, J., Syed, A., Desai, M.Y., Halliburton, S., Schoenhagen, P., Flamm, S.D. and Sola, S. (2009) Temporal Trends in Utilization of Cardiac Computed Tomography. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, 3, 16-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2008.10.009
[27]	Gibbons, R.J., Miller, T.D., Hodge, D., Urban, L., Araoz, P.A., Pellikka, P. and McKully, R.B. (2008) Application of Appropriateness Criteria to Stress Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Sestamibi Studies and Stress Echocardiograms in an Academic Medical Center. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 51, 1283-1289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.10.064
[28]	Picano, E., Pasanisi, E., Brown, J. and Marwick, T.H. (2007) A Gatekeeper for the Gatekeeper: Inappropriate Referrals to Stress Echocardiography. American Heart Journal, 154, 285-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.032
[29]	Hurwitz, L.M., Reiman, R.E., Yoshizumi, T.T., Goodman, P.C., Toncheva, G., Nguyen, G. and Lowry, C. (2007) Radiation Dose from Contemporary Cardiothoracic Multidetector CT Protocols with an Anthropomorphic Female Phantom: Implications for Cancer Induction. Radiology, 245, 742-750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2453062046
[30]	Shrimpton, P.C., Wall, B.F., Yoshizumi, T.T., Hurwitz, L.M. and Goodman, P.C. (2009) Effective Dose and DoseLength Product in CT. Radiology, 250, 604-605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2502081340