ACR–SPR PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR PERFORMING AND INTERPRETING DIAGNOSTIC COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY (CT)

PREAMBLE

INTRODUCTION

II.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

Physician

II.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

Qualified Medical Physicist

II.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

Non-Physician Radiology Provider (NPRP)

II.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

Radiologic Technologist

III.

SPECIFICATIONS OF THE EXAMINATION

IV.

DOCUMENTATION

EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS

VI.

RADIATION SAFETY IN IMAGING

VI.

RADIATION SAFETY IN IMAGING

Actions Specifically for CT

VI.

RADIATION SAFETY IN IMAGING

Safety Guidelines

QUALITY CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT, SAFETY, INFECTION CONTROL, AND PATIENT EDUCATION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

1. Mahesh M. The Basics - Technology, Image Quality and Radiation Dose. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.
2. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report 160. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 2009.
3. Kubo T. Vendor free basics of radiation dose reduction techniques for CT. Eur J Radiol. 2019 Jan;110():S0720-048X(18)30397-8.
4. Coakley FV, Gould R, Yeh BM, Arenson RL. CT radiation dose: what can you do right now in your practice?. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Mar;196(3):619-25.
5. Goodman TR, Mustafa A, Rowe E. Pediatric CT radiation exposure: where we were, and where we are now. Pediatr Radiol. 2019 Apr;49(4):469-478.
6. American College of Radiology. ACR Radiology Safety Site. Available at: https://www.acr.org/Practice-Management-Quality-Informatics. .
7. Berrington de González A, Kim KP, Berg CD. Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55: estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J Med Screen. 2008;15(3):153-8.
8. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(22):2071-2077.
9. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med. 2009 Dec 14;169(22):2078-86.
10. Poon R, Badawy MK. Radiation dose and risk to the lens of the eye during CT examinations of the brain. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019 Dec;63(6):786-794.
11. Fletcher JG, Kofler JM, Coburn JA, Bruining DH, McCollough CH. Perspective on radiation risk in CT imaging. Abdominal Imaging 2013;38:22-31.
12. Marcu LG, Chau M, Bezak E. How much is too much? Systematic review of cumulative doses from radiological imaging and the risk of cancer in children and young adults. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2021 Apr;160():S1040-8428(21)00080-9.
13. Sodickson A. Strategies for reducing radiation exposure in multi-detector row CT. Radiol Clin North Am. 2012 Jan;50(1):1-14.
14. American College of Radiology. ACR Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. Manual on Contrast Media. Available at: https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Contrast-Manual.
15. American College of Radiology. ACR–SPR Practice Parameter for the use of Intravascular Contrast Media. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=142+&releaseId=2
16. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for Continuing Medical Education. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=130+&releaseId=2
17. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=74+&releaseId=2
18. American College of Radiology. ACR–AAPM Technical Standard for Diagnostic Medical Physics Performance Monitoring of Computed Tomography (CT) Equipment. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=131+&releaseId=2
19. American College of Radiology. Image Gently Campaign. Available at: http://www.imagegently.org/. .
20. Higaki T, Nakamura Y, Fukumoto W, Honda Y, Tatsugami F, Awai K. Clinical application of radiation dose reduction at abdominal CT. Eur J Radiol. 2019 Feb;111():S0720-048X(18)30455-8.
21. Ohno Y, Koyama H, Seki S, Kishida Y, Yoshikawa T. Radiation dose reduction techniques for chest CT: Principles and clinical results. [Review]. Eur J Radiol. 111:93-103, 2019 Feb.
22. Kaza RK, Ananthakrishnan L, Kambadakone A, Platt JF. Update of Dual-Energy CT Applications in the Genitourinary Tract. [Review]. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 208(6):1185-1192, 2017 Jun.
23. Sodickson AD, Keraliya A, Czakowski B, Primak A, Wortman J, Uyeda JW. Dual energy CT in clinical routine: how it works and how it adds value. Emerg Radiol. 2021 Feb;28(1):103-117.
24. Yeh BM, Shepherd JA, Wang ZJ, Teh HS, Hartman RP, Prevrhal S. Dual-energy and low-kVp CT in the abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Jul;193(1):47-54.
25. American College of Radiology. ACR–SIR Practice Parameter For Minimal and/or Moderate Sedation/Analgesia. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=95+&releaseId=2
26. American College of Radiology. ACR-ASER-SABI-SPR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Pediatric Computed Tomography (CT). Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=77+&releaseId=2
27. Bauhs JA, Vrieze TJ, Primak AN, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH. CT dosimetry: comparison of measurement techniques and devices. Radiographics. 2008;28(1):245-53.
28. Kubo T, Lin PJ, Stiller W, et al. Radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Feb;190(2):335-43.
29. Ledenius K, Gustavsson M, Johansson S, Stålhammar F, Wiklund LM, Thilander-Klang A. Effect of tube current on diagnostic image quality in paediatric cerebral multidetector CT images. Br J Radiol. 2009 Apr;82(976):313-20.
30. Lee IS, Kim HJ, Choi BK, et al. A pragmatic protocol for reduction in the metal artifact and radiation dose in multislice computed tomography of the spine: cadaveric evaluation after cervical pedicle screw placement. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31(4):635-41.
31. Singh SS, Kalra MM, Moore MM, et al. Dose reduction and compliance with pediatric CT protocols adapted to patient size, clinical indication, and number of prior studies. Radiology 252:200-8, .
32. Smith AB, Dillon WP, Gould R, Wintermark M. Radiation dose-reduction strategies for neuroradiology CT protocols. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007 Oct;28(9):1628-32.
33. Strauss KJ, Goske MJ, Kaste SC, et al. Image gently: Ten steps you can take to optimize image quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Apr;194(4):868-73.
34. Chandra T, Podberesky DJ, Romberg EK, Tang ER, Iyer RS, Epelman M. Optimization of Pediatric Body CT Angiography: What Radiologists Need to Know. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Sep;215(3):726-735.
35. Kaasalainen T, Palmu K, Reijonen V, Kortesniemi M. Effect of patient centering on patient dose and image noise in chest CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Jul;203(1):123-30.
36. Zygmont ME, Neill R, Dharmadhikari S, Raach P, Duong PT. Achieving Joint Commission Regulatory Compliance: Quality Improvement Process for CT Protocol Review and Dose Alert Reduction. J Am Coll Radiol. 2019 Feb;16(2):S1546-1440(18)31042-1.
37. Szczykutowicz TP, Bour RK, Pozniak M, Ranallo FN. Compliance with AAPM Practice Guideline 1.a: CT Protocol Management and Review - from the perspective of a university hospital. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015 Mar 08;16(2):5023.
38. American College of Radiology. ACR-SPR Practice Parameter for Imaging Pregnant or Potentially Pregnant Patients with Ionizing Radiation. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=23+&releaseId=2.