Local diagnostic reference levels for digital mammography: Two hospitals study in northwest, Nigeria

Author(s):  
I. Garba ◽  
H.S. Bashir ◽  
F. Bello ◽  
K.S. Nuhu ◽  
S. Mohammed ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moayyad E Suleiman ◽  
Mark F McEntee ◽  
Lucy Cartwright ◽  
Jennifer Diffey ◽  
Patrick C Brennan

2014 ◽  
Vol 167 (4) ◽  
pp. 608-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moayyad E. Suleiman ◽  
Patrick C. Brennan ◽  
Mark F. McEntee

Author(s):  
Qiumei Liu ◽  
Moayyad E Suleiman ◽  
Mark F McEntee ◽  
BaoLin P Soh

Abstract Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in digital mammography (DM) serve as a useful benchmark for dose monitoring and optimization, allowing comparison amongst countries, institutions and mammography units. A systematic review of DRLs in DM, published in 2014, reported a lack of consistent and internationally accepted protocol in DRLs establishment, thereby resulting in wide variations in methodologies which complicates comparability between studies. In 2017, the International Commission of Radiation Protection (ICRP) published additional guidelines and recommendations to provide clarity in the protocol used in DRLs establishment. With the continuing evolvement of technology, optimization of examinations and updates in guidelines and recommendations, DRLs should be revised at regular intervals. This systematic review aims to provide an update and identify a more consistent protocol in the methodologies used to establish DRLs. Searches were conducted through Web of Science, PubMed-MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, CINAHL and Google Scholar, which resulted in 766 articles, of which 19 articles were included after screening. Relevant data from the included studies were summarized and analyzed. While the additional guidelines and recommendations have provided clarifications in the methodologies used in DRLs establishment, such as data source (i.e., the preference to use data derived from patient instead of phantoms to establish DRLs), protocol (i.e., stratification of DRLs by compressed breast thickness and detector technology, and the use of median value for DRLs quantity instead of mean) and percentiles used to establish DRLs (i.e., set at the 75th percentile with a minimum sample size of 50 patients), other differences such as the lack of a standard dose calculation method used to estimate mean glandular dose continues to complicate comparisons between studies and different DM systems. This systematic review update incorporated the updated guidelines and recommendations from ICRP which will serve as a useful resource for future research efforts related to DRLs, dose monitoring and optimization.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 341-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Ognard ◽  
David Bourhis ◽  
René Anxionnat ◽  
Douraied Ben Salem

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472199425
Author(s):  
Kiran R. Madhvani ◽  
Matthew J. R. Clark ◽  
Alex A. J. Kocheta

Background: Diagnostic reference levels are radiation dose levels in medical radiodiagnostic practices for typical examinations for groups of standard-sized individuals for broadly defined types of equipment. This study aimed to contribute to national diagnostic reference levels for common hand and wrist procedures using mini C-arm fluoroscopy. Small joint and digital fracture procedure diagnostic reference levels have not been reported in significant numbers previously with procedure-level stratification. Methods: Data were collected from fluoroscopy logbooks and were cross-referenced against the audit log kept on fluoroscopy machines. A total of 603 procedures were included. Results: The median radiation dose for wrist fracture open fixation was 2.73 cGycm2, Kirschner wiring (K-wiring) procedures was 2.36 cGycm2, small joint arthrodesis was 1.20 cGycm2, small joint injections was 0.58 cGycm2, and phalangeal fracture fixation was 1.05 cGycm2. Conclusions: Wrist fracture fixation used higher radiation doses than phalangeal fracture fixation, arthrodeses, and injections. Injections used significantly less radiation than the other procedures. There are significant differences in total radiation doses when comparing these procedures in hand and wrist surgery. National and international recommendations are that institutional audit data should be collected regularly and should be stratified by procedure type. This study helps to define standards for this activity by adding to the data available for wrist fracture diagnostic reference levels and defining standards for digital and injection procedures.


2021 ◽  
pp. jnmt.121.262175
Author(s):  
Mashari Alnaaimi ◽  
Mousa Alduaij ◽  
Musab Algaily ◽  
Fisal Shanawey ◽  
Talal Mohammedzein ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document