Advertisement

Comparative dose levels between CT-scanner and slot-scanning device (EOS system) in pregnant women pelvimetry

  • A. Ben Abdennebi
    Affiliations
    Regional and University Hospital of Besançon, 25000 Besançon, France

    Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences of Tunis, 2092 El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia

    Laboratory on Energy and Matter for Nuclear Sciences Development, LR16CNSTN02, Tunisia
    Search for articles by this author
  • S. Aubry
    Affiliations
    Regional and University Hospital of Besançon, 25000 Besançon, France

    Nanomedicine Lab Imagery and Therapeutics EA 4662, University of Franche-Comte, 25000 Besancon, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • L. Ounalli
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Department of Nuclear Safety, National Center for Nuclear Sciences and Technology, Technopark Sidi Thabet, 2020 Ariana, Tunisia.
    Affiliations
    National Center for Nuclear Sciences and Technology, 2020 Ariana, Tunisia

    Laboratory on Energy and Matter for Nuclear Sciences Development, LR16CNSTN02, Tunisia
    Search for articles by this author
  • M.S. Fayache
    Affiliations
    Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences of Tunis, 2092 El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia

    Laboratory on Energy and Matter for Nuclear Sciences Development, LR16CNSTN02, Tunisia
    Search for articles by this author
  • E. Delabrousse
    Affiliations
    Regional and University Hospital of Besançon, 25000 Besançon, France

    Nanomedicine Lab Imagery and Therapeutics EA 4662, University of Franche-Comte, 25000 Besancon, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • Y. Petegnief
    Affiliations
    Regional and University Hospital of Besançon, 25000 Besançon, France
    Search for articles by this author
Published:December 17, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.12.008

      Highlights

      • A comparison between the EOS imaging system and CT scanner is proposed.
      • The comparison leads to lower doses with EOS imaging system than with CT scanner.
      • The EOS system is less irradiating than the CT-scan in the out-of-field region.
      • The EOS system may have an advantage by reducing effective doses in radio-sensitive organs.

      Abstract

      Purpose

      To estimate fetal absorbed doses for pregnant women pelvimetry, a comparative study between EOS imaging system and low-dose spiral CT-scanner was carried out. For this purpose three different studies were investigated: in vivo, in vitro and Monte Carlo calculations.

      Methods

      In vivo dosimetry was performed, using OSL NanoDot dosimeters, to determine the dose to the skin of twenty pregnant women. In vitro studies were established by using a cubic phantom of water, in order to estimate the out of field doses. In the latter study, OSLDs were placed at depths corresponding to the lowest, average and highest position of the uterus. Monte Carlo calculations of effective doses to high radio-sensitive organs were established, using PCXMC and CTExpo software suites for EOS imaging system and CT-scanner, respectively.

      Results

      The EOS imaging system reduces radiation exposure 4 to 8 times compared to the CT-scanner. The entrance skin doses were 74% (p-values <0.01) higher with the CT-scanner than with the EOS system. In the out of field region, the measured doses of the EOS system were reduced by 80% (p-values <0.02).
      Monte Carlo calculations confirmed that effective doses to organs are less accentuated for EOS than for CT pelvimetry.

      Conclusions

      The EOS system is less irradiating than the CT exam. The out-of-field dose which is significant, is lower in the EOS than in the CT-scanner and could be reduced even further by optimizing the time used for image acquisition.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. Brent R, Mettler F, Wagner L, Streffer C, Berry M, He S, Kusama T. Pregnancy and medical radiation ICRP Publication 84. Ann. 2001;ICRP 30.

        • Economides S.
        • Boziari A.
        • Vogiatzi S.
        • Hourdakis K.J.
        • Kamenopoulou V.
        • Dimitriou P.
        Prevention of and response to inadvertent exposure of embryo/fetus to ionizing radiation, due to medical exposure of the mother. The Greek regulatory authority initiatives.
        Phys Med. 2014; 30: 155-159
        • Thompson M.A.
        Maintaining a proper perspective of risk associated with radiation exposure.
        Nucl Med Technol. 2001; 29: 137-142
        • Zeng W.
        Communicating radiation exposure: a simple approach.
        Nucl Med Technol. 2001; 29: 156-158
        • EC
        Guidance on diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for medical exposures.
        Radiat Prot. 1999; 109: 11-12
        • Doshi S.K.
        • Negus I.S.
        • Oduko J.M.
        Fetal radiation dose from CT pulmonary angiography in late pregnancy: a phantom study.
        Br Radiol. 2008; 81: 653-658
        • Keller T.M.
        • Rake A.
        • Michel S.C.
        • Seifert B.
        • Efe G.
        • Treiber K.
        • et al.
        Obstetric MR pelvimetry: reference values and evaluation of inter- and intra observer error and intra individual variability.
        Radiology. 2003; 227: 37-43
        • Toppenberg K.S.
        • Ashley Hill D.
        • Miller David P.
        Safety of radiographic imaging during pregnancy.
        Am Family Physician. 1999; 59: 1813-1818
      2. Dowsett David J, Kenny Patrick A, Eugene Johnston R. The physics of diagnostic imaging, 2nd ed.;2006;0–0.

        • Angel E.
        • Wellnitz C.V.
        • Goodsitt M.M.
        • Yaghmai N.
        • DeMarco J.J.
        • Cagnon C.H.
        • et al.
        Radiation dose to the fetus for pregnant patients undergoing multi detector CT imaging: Monte carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size.
        Radiology. 2008; 249: 220-227
        • Kneale GW
        • Stewart AM
        Mantel-Haenszel analysis of Oxford data. II. Independent effects of fetal irradiation subfactors.
        Natl Cancer Inst. 1976; 57: 1009-1014
        • Sigmann M.H.
        • Delabrousse E.
        • Riethmuller D.
        • Runge M.
        • Peyron C.
        • Aubry S.
        An evaluation of the EOS X-ray imaging system in pelvimetry.
        Diagn Interventional Imaging. 2014; 95: 833-838
        • Pomerantz M.L.
        • Glaser D.
        • Doan J.
        • Kumar S.
        • Edmonds E.W.
        Three-dimensional biplanar radiography as a new means of accessing femoral version: a comparitive study of EOS three-dimensional radiography versus computed tomography.
        Skeletal Radiol. 2015; 44: 255-260
        • Melhem E.
        • Assi A.
        • El Rachkidi R.
        • Ghanem I.
        EOS biplanar X-ray imaging: concept, developments, benefits and limitations.
        Child Orthop. 2016; 10: 1-14
        • Damet J.
        • Fournier P.
        • Monnin P.
        • Sans-Merce1 M.
        • Ceroni D.
        • Zand T.
        • et al.
        Occupational and patient exposure as well as image quality for full spine examinations with the EOS imaging system.
        Med Phys. 2014; 41: 063901
        • Anderson N.
        X-ray pelvimetry: helpful or harmful?.
        Fam Pract. 1983; 17: 405-412
        • Sibony O.
        • Alran S.
        • Oury J.F.
        Vaginal birth after cesarean section: X-ray pelvimetry at termis informative.
        Perinat Med. 2006; 34: 212-215
        • Thomas S.M.
        • Bees N.R.
        • Adam E.J.
        Trends in the use of pelvimetry techniques.
        Clin Radiol. 1998; 53: 293-295
        • Breidt D.
        • Bouquigny F.
        • Clément J.P.
        • Menéchal P.
        • Levert M.
        • Quéreux C.
        • et al.
        Helical CT pelvimetry: advantages of a low dose volume acquisition technique.
        Radiology. 2003; 84: 1027-1030
        • Sigmann M.-H.
        • Delabrousse E.
        • Riethmuller D.
        • Runge M.
        • Peyron C.
        • Aubry S.
        An evaluation of the EOS X-ray imaging system in pelvimetry.
        Diagn Interventional Imaging. 2014; 95: 833-838
        • McKenna C.
        • Wade R.
        • Faria R.
        • Yang H.
        • Stirk L.
        • Gummerson N.
        • et al.
        EOS 2D/3D X-ray imaging system: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
        Health Technol Assess. 2012; 16: 14
        • Després P.
        • Beaudoina G.
        • Gravelb P.
        • DeGuiseb J.A.
        Evaluation of a full-scale gas microstrip detector for low-dose X-ray imaging.
        Nucl Inst Methods Phys Res. 2005; 536: 52-60
        • Greffier J.
        • Pereira F.
        • Macri F.
        • Beregi J.P.
        • Larbi A.
        CT dose reduction using automatic exposure control and iterative reconstruction: a chest pediatric phantoms study.
        Phys Med. 2016; 32: 582-589
        • Jermoumi M.
        • Korideck H.
        • Bhagwat M.
        • Zygmanski P.
        • Makrigiogos G.M.
        • Berbeco R.I.
        • et al.
        Comprehensive quality assurance phantom for the small animal radiation research platform (SARRP).
        Phys Med. 2015; 31: 529-535
        • Al-Senan R.M.
        • Hatab M.R.
        Characteristics of an OSLD in the diagnostic energy range.
        Med Phys. 2011; 38: 4396-4405
      3. International Commission of Radiological Protection. The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. ICRP Publication 103; 2007.

        • Deschênes S.
        • Charron G.
        • Beaudoin G.
        • Labelle H.
        • Dubois J.
        • Miron M.C.
        • Parent S.
        Diagnostic imaging of spinal deformities: reducing patients radiation dose with a new slot-scanning X-ray imager.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35: 989-994
        • Giles D.
        • Hewit D.
        • Stewart A.M.
        • Webb J.
        Malignant disease in childhood and diagnostic irradiation in utero.
        Lancet. 1956; 271: 447
        • Stewart A.M.
        • Kneale G.W.
        Radiation dose effects in relation to obstetric x-rays and childhood cancers.
        Lancet. 1970; 1: 1185-1188
        • Doll R.
        • Wakeford R.
        Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation.
        Br Radiol. 1997; 70: 130-139
        • Osei E.K.
        • Faulkner K.
        Fetal doses from radiological examinations.
        Br Radiol. 1999; 72: 773-780
        • Bittersohl B.
        • Freitas J.
        • Zaps D.
        • Schmitz M.R.
        • Bomar J.D.
        • Muhamad A.R.
        • et al.
        EOS imaging of the human pelvis: reliability, validity, and controlled comparison with radiography.
        Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95: e58
        • Folinais D.
        • Thelen P.
        • Delin C.
        • Radier C.
        • Catonne Y.
        • Lazennec J.Y.
        Measuring femoral and rotational alignment: EOS system versus computed tomography.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013; 99: 509-516
        • Lazennec J.Y.
        • Rousseau M.A.
        • Rangel A.
        • Gorin M.
        • Belicourt C.
        • Brusson A.
        • et al.
        Pelvis and total hip arthroplasty acetabular component orientations in sitting and standing positions: measurements reproductibility with EOS imaging system versus conventional radiographies.
        Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011; 97: 373-380
        • Dubousset J.
        • Charpak G.
        • Dorion I.
        • Skalli W.
        • Lavaste F.
        • Deguise J.
        • et al.
        A new 2D and 3D imaging approach to musculo-skeletal physiology and pathology with low dose radiation and the standing position: the EOS system.
        Bull Acad Natl Med. 2005; 189: 287-297