scholarly journals Determining and updating PET/CT and SPECT/CT diagnostic reference levels: A systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 182 (4) ◽  
pp. 532-545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Essam M Alkhybari ◽  
Mark F McEntee ◽  
Patrick C Brennan ◽  
Kathy P Willowson ◽  
Peter Hogg ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. R71-R98
Author(s):  
Mohamad Fawzi Awad ◽  
Lina Karout ◽  
Ghida Arnous ◽  
Mohammad Ahmmad Rawashdeh ◽  
Layal Hneiny ◽  
...  

Radiology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 293 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray D. Becker ◽  
Priscilla F. Butler ◽  
Mazen Siam ◽  
Dustin A. Gress ◽  
Munir Ghesani ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Duminda Satharasinghe ◽  
Jeyasugiththan Jeyasingam. ◽  
W M N M B Wanninayake ◽  
Aruna Pallewatte

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Essam M Alkhybari ◽  
Mark F McEntee ◽  
Patrick C Brennan ◽  
Kathy P Willowson ◽  
Peter L Kench

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 799-806
Author(s):  
Koichiro Abe ◽  
Makoto Hosono ◽  
Takayuki Igarashi ◽  
Takashi Iimori ◽  
Masanobu Ishiguro ◽  
...  

Abstract The diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are one of several effective tools for optimizing nuclear medicine examinations and reducing patient exposure. With the advances in imaging technology and alterations of examination protocols, the DRLs must be reviewed periodically. The first DRLs in Japan were established in 2015, and since 5 years have passed, it is time to review and revise the DRLs. We conducted a survey to investigate the administered activities of radiopharmaceuticals and the radiation doses of computed tomography (CT) in hybrid CT accompanied by single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT and positron emission tomography (PET)/CT. We distributed a Web-based survey to 915 nuclear medicine facilities throughout Japan and survey responses were provided by 256 nuclear medicine facilities (response rate 28%). We asked for the facility's median actual administered activity and median radiation dose of hybrid CT when SPECT/CT or PET/CT was performed for patients with standard habitus in the standard protocol of the facility for each nuclear medicine examination. We determined the new DRLs based on the 75th percentile referring to the 2015 DRLs, drug package inserts, and updated guidelines. The 2020 DRLs are almost the same as the 2015 DRLs, but for the relatively long-lived radionuclides, the DRLs are set low due to the changes in the Japanese delivery system. There are no items set higher than the previous values. Although the DRLs determined this time are roughly equivalent to the DRLs used in the US, overall they tend to be higher than the European DRLs. The DRLs of the radiation dose of CT in hybrid CT vary widely depending on each imaging site and the purpose of the examination.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document