Urologia · 2021
Do low dose CT-KUBs really expose patients to more radiation than plain abdominal radiographs?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Bob, Suhail Noorunisa, Marais Johan, Brewin James
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Urolithiasis patients often require frequent urinary tract imaging, leading to high radiation exposure. CT Kidney-Ureter-Bladder (CT-KUB) is the gold standard in urolithiasis detection, however it is thought to harbour significant radiation load. Urologists have therefore utilised abdominal radiographs (XR-KUB) as an alternative, though with markedly lower sensitivity and specificity. We present the first contemporary UK study comparing the effective doses of XR-KUBs with low dose CT-KUBs.
METHOD: Fifty-three patients were retrospectively identified in a single centre who underwent both a XR-KUB and a CT-KUB in 2018. Effective-Dose was measured by converting the recorded 'Dose Area/Length Product' via the International Commission on Radiological Protection formula.
RESULTS: The average effective dose of XR-KUBs and low dose CT-KUBs were 5.10 mSv and 5.31 mSv respectively. Thirty-four percent (18/53) of patients had a XR-KUBs with a higher effective dose than their low dose CT-KUB. Patients with higher Weight, BMI and AP diameter had higher effective doses for both their XR and low dose CT-KUBs. All patients in our study weighing over 92 kg or with a BMI greater than 32 had a XR-KUBs with a higher effective dose than their low dose CT-KUB.
CONCLUSION: This data supports moving away from XR-KUBs for the investigation of urolithiasis, particularly in patients with a high BMI.
METHOD: Fifty-three patients were retrospectively identified in a single centre who underwent both a XR-KUB and a CT-KUB in 2018. Effective-Dose was measured by converting the recorded 'Dose Area/Length Product' via the International Commission on Radiological Protection formula.
RESULTS: The average effective dose of XR-KUBs and low dose CT-KUBs were 5.10 mSv and 5.31 mSv respectively. Thirty-four percent (18/53) of patients had a XR-KUBs with a higher effective dose than their low dose CT-KUB. Patients with higher Weight, BMI and AP diameter had higher effective doses for both their XR and low dose CT-KUBs. All patients in our study weighing over 92 kg or with a BMI greater than 32 had a XR-KUBs with a higher effective dose than their low dose CT-KUB.
CONCLUSION: This data supports moving away from XR-KUBs for the investigation of urolithiasis, particularly in patients with a high BMI.