Comparison of Anatomical and Indication‐Based Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) in Head CT Imaging: Implications for Radiation Dose Management

<b>Introduction:</b> Many diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in computed tomography (CT) imaging are based mainly on anatomical locations and often overlook variations in radiation exposure due to different clinical indications. While indication-based DRLs, derived from dose descriptors like volume-weighted CT dose index (CTDI<sub>vol</sub>) and dose length product (DLP), are recommended for optimising patient radiation exposure, many studies still use anatomical-based DRL values. This study is aimed at quantifying the differences between anatomical and indication-based DRL values in head CT imaging and assessing its implications for radiation dose management. This will support the narrative when explaining the distinction between indication-based DRLs and anatomical DRLs for patients' dose management. <b>Methods:</b> Employing a retrospective quantitative study design, we developed and compared anatomical and common indication-based DRL values using a dataset of head CT scans with similar characteristics. The indications included in the study were brain tumor/intracranial space-occupying lesion (ISOL), head injury/trauma, stroke, and anatomical examinations. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS Version 29. <b>Results:</b> The findings suggest that using anatomical-based DLP DRL values for CT head examinations leads to underestimations in the median, 25th percentile, and 75th percentile values of head injury/trauma by 20.2%, 30.0%, and 14.5% in single-phase CT head procedures. Conversely, for the entire examination, using anatomical-based DLP DRL as a benchmark for CT stroke DRL overestimates median, 25th percentile, and 75th percentile values by 18.3%, 23.9%, and 13.5%. Brain tumor/ISOL DL<i>P</i> values are underestimated by 62.6%, 60.4%, and 71.8%, respectively. <b>Conclusion:</b>The study highlights that using anatomical DLP DRL values for specific indications in head CT scans can lead to underestimated or overestimated DL<i>P</i> values, making them less reliable for radiation management compared to indication-based DRLs. Therefore, it is imperative to promote the establishment and use of indication-based DRLs for more accurate dose management in CT imaging.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Biomedical Imaging
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1155/ijbi/6464273
Primary Topic
Radiation Dose and Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Anatomical and Indication‐Based Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) in Head CT Imaging: Implications for Radiation Dose Management

Benard Ohene Botwe, S. Anim-Sampong, R Saizi
International Journal of Biomedical Imaging
Radiation Dose and Imaging
article

Comparison of Anatomical and Indication‐Based Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) in Head CT Imaging: Implications for Radiation Dose Management

Benard Ohene Botwe, S. Anim-Sampong, R Saizi
article en

Abstract

<b>Introduction:</b> Many diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in computed tomography (CT) imaging are based mainly on anatomical locations and often overlook variations in radiation exposure due to different clinical indications. While indication-based DRLs, derived from dose descriptors like volume-weighted CT dose index (CTDI<sub>vol</sub>) and dose length product (DLP), are recommended for optimising patient radiation exposure, many studies still use anatomical-based DRL values. This study is aimed at quantifying the differences between anatomical and indication-based DRL values in head CT imaging and assessing its implications for radiation dose management. This will support the narrative when explaining the distinction between indication-based DRLs and anatomical DRLs for patients' dose management. <b>Methods:</b> Employing a retrospective quantitative study design, we developed and compared anatomical and common indication-based DRL values using a dataset of head CT scans with similar characteristics. The indications included in the study were brain tumor/intracranial space-occupying lesion (ISOL), head injury/trauma, stroke, and anatomical examinations. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS Version 29. <b>Results:</b> The findings suggest that using anatomical-based DLP DRL values for CT head examinations leads to underestimations in the median, 25th percentile, and 75th percentile values of head injury/trauma by 20.2%, 30.0%, and 14.5% in single-phase CT head procedures. Conversely, for the entire examination, using anatomical-based DLP DRL as a benchmark for CT stroke DRL overestimates median, 25th percentile, and 75th percentile values by 18.3%, 23.9%, and 13.5%. Brain tumor/ISOL DL<i>P</i> values are underestimated by 62.6%, 60.4%, and 71.8%, respectively. <b>Conclusion:</b>The study highlights that using anatomical DLP DRL values for specific indications in head CT scans can lead to underestimated or overestimated DL<i>P</i> values, making them less reliable for radiation management compared to indication-based DRLs. Therefore, it is imperative to promote the establishment and use of indication-based DRLs for more accurate dose management in CT imaging.

International Journal of Biomedical ImagingVol. 2025(1)
University of Ghana (GH), City, University of London (GB), Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital (MW)
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Radiation Dose and Imaging
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.