Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 57
Filter
1.
Front Public Health ; 9: 733337, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775870

ABSTRACT

Space radiobiology is an interdisciplinary science that examines the biological effects of ionizing radiation on humans involved in aerospace missions. The dose-effect models are one of the relevant topics of space radiobiology. Their knowledge is crucial for optimizing radioprotection strategies (e.g., spaceship and lunar space station-shielding and lunar/Mars village design), the risk assessment of the health hazard related to human space exploration, and reducing damages induced to astronauts from galactic cosmic radiation. Dose-effect relationships describe the observed damages to normal tissues or cancer induction during and after space flights. They are developed for the various dose ranges and radiation qualities characterizing the actual and the forecast space missions [International Space Station (ISS) and solar system exploration]. Based on a Pubmed search including 53 papers reporting the collected dose-effect relationships after space missions or in ground simulations, 7 significant dose-effect relationships (e.g., eye flashes, cataract, central nervous systems, cardiovascular disease, cancer, chromosomal aberrations, and biomarkers) have been identified. For each considered effect, the absorbed dose thresholds and the uncertainties/limitations of the developed relationships are summarized and discussed. The current knowledge on this topic can benefit from further in vitro and in vivo radiobiological studies, an accurate characterization of the quality of space radiation, and the numerous experimental dose-effects data derived from the experience in the clinical use of ionizing radiation for diagnostic or treatments with doses similar to those foreseen for the future space missions. The growing number of pooled studies could improve the prediction ability of dose-effect relationships for space exposure and reduce their uncertainty level. Novel research in the field is of paramount importance to reduce damages to astronauts from cosmic radiation before Beyond Low Earth Orbit exploration in the next future. The study aims at providing an overview of the published dose-effect relationships and illustrates novel perspectives to inspire future research.


Subject(s)
Cosmic Radiation , Astronauts , Cosmic Radiation/adverse effects , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Radiobiology
2.
Radiat Res ; 197(6): 605-612, 2022 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731640

ABSTRACT

Medical imaging plays a major role in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patient diagnosis and management. However, the radiation dose received from medical procedures by these patients has been poorly investigated. We aimed to estimate the cumulative effective dose (CED) related to medical exposure in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in comparison to the usual critically ill patients. We designed a descriptive cohort study including 90 successive ICU COVID-19 patients admitted between March and May 2020 and 90 successive non-COVID-19 patients admitted between March and May 2019. In this study, the CED resulting from all radiological examinations was calculated and clinical characteristics predictive of higher exposure risk identified. The number of radiological examinations was 12.0 (5.0-26.0) [median (interquartile range) in COVID-19 vs. 4.0 (2.0-8.0) in non-COVID-19 patient (P < 0.001)]. The CED during a four-month period was 4.2 mSv (1.9-11.2) in the COVID-19 vs. 1.2 mSv (0.13-6.19) in the non-COVID-19 patients (P < 0.001). In the survivors, the CED in COVID-19 vs. non-COVID-19 patients was ≥100 mSv in 3% vs. 0%, 10-100 mSv in 23% vs. 15%, 1-10 mSv in 56% vs. 30% and <1 mSv in 18% vs. 55%. The CED (P < 0.001) and CED per ICU hospitalization day (P = 0.004) were significantly higher in COVID-19 than non-COVID-19 patients. The CED correlated significantly with the hospitalization duration (r = 0.45, P < 0.001) and the number of conventional radiological examinations (r = 0.8, P < 0.001). To conclude, more radiological examinations were performed in critically ill COVID-19 patients than non-COVID-19 patients resulting in higher CED. In COVID-19 patients, contribution of strategies to limit CED should be investigated in the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Radiation Exposure , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Exposure/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies
3.
J Med Radiat Sci ; 69(2): 147-155, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1699409

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The use of ionising radiation results in occupational exposure to medical imaging professionals, requiring routine monitoring. This study aims to assess the effect of increased utilisation of mobile X-ray units, mobile imaging of non-routine body regions and radiographer work practice changes for impact on staff radiation dose during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of general radiology departments across two metropolitan hospitals was performed. Personal radiation monitor exposure reports between January 2019 and December 2020 were analysed. Statistical analysis was conducted using a Mann-Whitney U test when comparing each quarter, from 2019 to 2020. Categorical data were compared using a Chi-squared test. RESULTS: Mobile X-ray use during the pandemic increased approximately 1.7-fold, with the peak usage observed in September 2020. The mobile imaging rate per month of non-routine body regions increased from approximately 6.0-7.8%. Reported doses marginally increased during Q2, Q3 and Q4 of 2020 (in comparison to 2019 data), though was not statistically significant (Q2: P = 0.13; Q3: P = 0.31 and Q4 P = 0.32). In Q1, doses marginally decreased and were not statistically significant (P = 0.22). CONCLUSION: Increased utilisation and work practice changes had no significant effect on reported staff radiation dose. The average reported dose remained significantly lower than the occupational dose limits for radiation workers of 20 mSv.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , Radiation Dosage , Retrospective Studies , X-Rays
4.
Cells ; 11(3)2022 01 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667055

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread worldwide with over 260 million people infected and more than 5 million deaths, numbers that are escalating on a daily basis. Frontline health workers and scientists diligently fight to alleviate life-threatening symptoms and control the spread of the disease. There is an urgent need for better triage of patients, especially in third world countries, in order to decrease the pressure induced on healthcare facilities. In the struggle to treat life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia, scientists have debated the clinical use of ionizing radiation (IR). The historical literature dating back to the 1940s contains many reports of successful treatment of pneumonia with IR. In this work, we critically review the literature for the use of IR for both diagnostic and treatment purposes. We identify details including the computed tomography (CT) scanning considerations, the radiobiological basis of IR anti-inflammatory effects, the supportive evidence for low dose radiation therapy (LDRT), and the risks of radiation-induced cancer and cardiac disease associated with LDRT. In this paper, we address concerns regarding the effective management of COVID-19 patients and potential avenues that could provide empirical evidence for the fight against the disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/radiotherapy , Lung/radiation effects , Pneumonia, Viral/radiotherapy , Radiation, Ionizing , SARS-CoV-2/radiation effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Lung/virology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prognosis , Radiation Dosage , Radiotherapy Dosage , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
5.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263261, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1666769

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association between the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and post-inflammatory emphysematous lung alterations on follow-up low-dose CT scans. METHODS: Consecutive patients with proven COVID-19 infection and a follow-up CT were retrospectively reviewed. The severity of pulmonary involvement was classified as mild, moderate and severe. Total lung volume, emphysema volume and the ratio of emphysema/-to-lung volume were quantified semi-automatically and compared inter-individually between initial and follow-up CT and to a control group of healthy, age- and sex-matched patients. Lung density was further assessed by drawing circular regions of interest (ROIs) into non-affected regions of the upper lobes. RESULTS: A total of 32 individuals (mean age: 64 ± 13 years, 12 females) with at least one follow-up CT (mean: 52 ± 66 days, range: 5-259) were included. In the overall cohort, total lung volume, emphysema volume and the ratio of lung-to-emphysema volume did not differ significantly between the initial and follow-up scans. In the subgroup of COVID-19 patients with > 30 days of follow-up, the emphysema volume was significantly larger as compared to the subgroup with a follow-up < 30 days (p = 0.045). Manually measured single ROIs generally yielded lower attenuation values prior to COVID-19 pneumonia, but the difference was not significant between groups (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients with a follow-up CT >30 days showed significant emphysematous lung alterations. These findings may help to explain the long-term effect of COVID-19 on pulmonary function and warrant validation by further studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Pulmonary Emphysema/complications , Pulmonary Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Radiation Dosage , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Case-Control Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Lung/physiopathology , Lung Volume Measurements , Male , Middle Aged , Pulmonary Emphysema/physiopathology , Retrospective Studies
6.
Curr Med Imaging ; 18(1): 38-44, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1624976

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of low-dose chest CT acquisition protocol for the imaging of COVID 19 disease or suspects of this disease in adults. METHODS: In this retrospective case-control study, the study group consisted of 141 patients who were imaged with low dose chest CT acquisition protocol. The control group consisted of 92 patients who were imaged with standard protocol. Anteroposterior and lateral diameters of chest, effective diameter and scan length, qualitative and quantitative noise levels, volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), dose length product (DLP), and size-specific dose estimations were compared between groups. RESULTS: Radiation dose reduction by nearly 90% (CTDIvol and DLP values 1.06 mGy and 40.3 mGy.cm vs. 8.07 mGy and 330 mGy.cm, respectively; p < 0.001) was achieved with the use of low-dose acquisition chest CT protocol. Despite higher image noise with low-dose acquisition protocol, no significant effect on diagnostic confidence was encountered. Cardiac and diaphragm movement-related artifacts were similar in both groups (p=0.275). Interobserver agreement was very good in terms of diagnostic confidence assessment. CONCLUSION: For the imaging of COVID-19 pneumonia or suspects of this disease in adults, lowdose chest CT acquisition protocol provides remarkable radiation dose reduction without adversely affecting image quality and diagnostic confidence.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Case-Control Studies , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
8.
Br J Radiol ; 95(1129): 20210835, 2022 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575206

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of a barrier shield in reducing droplet transmission and its effect on image quality and radiation dose in an interventional suite. METHODS: A human cough droplet visualisation model in a supine position was developed to assess efficacy of barrier shield in reducing environmental contamination. Its effect on image quality (resolution and contrast) was evaluated via image quality test phantom. Changes in the radiation dose to patient post-shield utilisation was measured. RESULTS: Use of the shield prevented escape of visible fluorescent cough droplets from the containment area. No subjective change in line-pair resolution was observed. No significant difference in contrast-to-noise ratio was measured. Radiation dosage to patient was increased; this is predominantly attributed to the increased air gap and not the physical properties of the shield. CONCLUSION: Use of the barrier shield provided an effective added layer of personal protection in the interventional radiology theatre for aerosol generating procedures. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first time a human supine cough droplet visualisation has been developed. While multiple types of barrier shields have been described, this is the first systematic practical evaluation of a barrier shield designed for use in the interventional radiology theatre.


Subject(s)
Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Protective Devices , Radiology, Interventional/instrumentation , Adult , COVID-19/transmission , Cough , Equipment Design , Fluorescence , Humans , Male , Phantoms, Imaging , Radiation Dosage , Signal-To-Noise Ratio , Supine Position
9.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 197(3-4): 135-145, 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1556863

ABSTRACT

We assessed variations in chest CT usage, radiation dose and image quality in COVID-19 pneumonia. Our study included all chest CT exams performed in 533 patients from 6 healthcare sites from Brazil. We recorded patients' age, gender and body weight and the information number of CT exams per patient, scan parameters and radiation doses (volume CT dose index-CTDIvol and dose length product-DLP). Six radiologists assessed all chest CT exams for the type of pulmonary findings and classified CT appearance of COVID-19 pneumonia as typical, indeterminate, atypical or negative. In addition, each CT was assessed for diagnostic quality (optimal or suboptimal) and presence of artefacts. Artefacts were frequent (367/841), often related to respiratory motion (344/367 chest CT exams with artefacts) and resulted in suboptimal evaluation in mid-to-lower lungs (176/344) or the entire lung (31/344). There were substantial differences in CT usage, patient weight, CTDIvol and DLP across the participating sites.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Brazil , Humans , Radiation Dosage , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
10.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 196(1-2): 120-127, 2021 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1437844

ABSTRACT

This study intends to evaluate the different lung CT scan protocols used for the diagnostic evaluation of COVID-19-induced lung disease in Iranian imaging centers in terms of radiation dose and image quality. After data collecting, subjective image quality, radiation dose and objective image quality such as noise, SNR and CNR were assessed. Statistically significant differences in effective dose and image quality were evident among different lung CT protocols. Lowest and highest effective dose was1.31 ± 0.53 mSv related to a protocol with activated AEC (reference mAs = 20) and 6.15 ± 0.57 mSv related to a protocol with Fixed mAs (mAs = 100), respectively. A protocol with enabled tube current modulation with 70 mAs as a reference mAs, and protocol with 20 mAs and enabled AEC had the best and lowest image quality, respectively. To optimize the scan parameters, AEC must be used, and a range of tube currents (between 20 and 50 mAs) can produce acceptable images in terms of diagnostic quality and radiation dose for the diagnosis of COVID-19-induced lung disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lung Diseases , Humans , Iran , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Radiation Dosage , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
11.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 195(2): 92-98, 2021 Sep 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1356711

ABSTRACT

Computed tomography (CT) provides useful information in patients with known or suspected COVID-19 infection. However, there are substantial variations and challenges in scanner technologies and scan practices that have negative effect on the image quality and can increase radiation dose associated with CT. OBJECTIVE: In this article, we present major issues and challenges with use of CT at five Brazilian CT facilities for imaging patients with known or suspected COVID-19 infection and offer specific mitigating strategies. METHODS: Observational, retrospective and prospective study of five CT facilities from different states and regions of Brazil, with approval of research and ethics committees. RESULTS: The most important issues include frequent use of CT, lack of up-to-date and efficient scanner technologies, over-scanning and patient off-centring. Mitigating strategies can include updating scanner technology and improving scan practices.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Brazil/epidemiology , Humans , Prospective Studies , Radiation Dosage , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(31): e26692, 2021 Aug 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1354336

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: To investigate computed tomography (CT) diagnostic reference levels for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia by collecting radiation exposure parameters of the most performed chest CT examinations and emphasize the necessity of low-dose CT in COVID-19 and its significance in radioprotection.The survey collected RIS data from 2119 chest CT examinations for 550 COVID-19 patients performed in 92 hospitals from January 23, 2020 to May 1, 2020. Dose data such as volume computed tomography dose index, dose-length product, and effective dose (ED) were recorded and analyzed. The radiation dose levels in different hospitals have been compared, and average ED and cumulative ED have been studied.The median dose-length product, volume computed tomography dose index, and ED measurements were 325.2 mGy cm with a range of 6.79 to 1098 mGy cm, 9.68 mGy with a range of 0.62 to 33.80 mGy, and 4.55 mSv with a range of 0.11 to 15.37 mSv for COVID-19 CT scanning protocols in Chongqing, China. The distribution of all observed EDs of radiation received by per patient undergoing CT protocols during hospitalization yielded a median cumulative ED of 17.34 mSv (range, 2.05-53.39 mSv) in the detection and management of COVID-19 patients. The average number of CT scan times for each patient was 4.0 ±â€Š2.0, and the average time interval between 2 CT scans was 7.0 ±â€Š5.0 days. The average cumulative ED of chest CT examinations for COVID-19 patients in Chongqing, China greatly exceeded public limit and the annual dose limit of occupational exposure in a short period.For patients with known or suspected COVID-19, a chest CT should be performed on the principle of rapid-scan, low-dose, single-phase protocol instead of routine chest CT protocol to minimize radiation doses and motion artifacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia/diagnostic imaging , Radiation Dosage , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/classification , Adult , COVID-19/complications , China , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/etiology , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/statistics & numerical data
14.
Diagn Interv Radiol ; 27(5): 607-614, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1329193

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The widespread use of computed tomography (CT) in COVID-19 may cause adverse biological effects. Many recommend to minimize radiation dose while maintaining diagnostic quality. This study was designed to evaluate the difference between findings of COVID-19 pneumonia on standard and low-dose protocols to provide data on the utility of the latter during initial imaging of COVID-19. METHODS: Patients suspected of having COVID-19 were scanned with a 128-slices scanner using two consecutive protocols in the same session (standard-dose scan: 120 kV and 300 mA; low-dose scan: 80 kV and 40 mA). Dose data acquisition and analysis was performed using an automated software. High and low-dose examinations were anonymized, shuffled and read by two radiologist with consensus according to a highly structured reporting format that was primarily based on the consensus statement of the RSNA. Accordingly, 8 typical, 2 indeterminate, and 7 atypical findings were investigated. Cases were then assigned to one of the categories: (i) Cov19Typ, typical COVID-19; (ii) Cov19Ind, indeterminate COVID-19; (iii) Cov19Aty, atypical COVID-19; (iv) Cov19Neg, not COVID-19. McNemar test was used to analyze the number of disagreements between standard and low-dose scans regarding paired proportions of structured findings. Inter- test reliability was tested using kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The study included 740 patients with a mean age of 44.05±16.59 years. The median (minimum-maximum) dose level for standard protocol was 189.98 mGy•cm (98.20-493.54 mGy•cm) and for low-dose protocol was 15.59 mGy•cm (11.59-32.37 mGy•cm) differing by -80 and -254 mGy•cm from pan-European diagnostic reference levels. Only two findings for typical, one finding for indeterminate, and three findings for atypical categories were statistically similar (p > 0.05). The difference in other categories resulted in significantly different final diagnosis for COVID-19 (p < 0.001). Overall, 626 patients received matching diagnoses with the two protocols. According to intertest reliability analysis, kappa value was found to be 0.669 (p < 0.001) to indicate substantial match. CT with standard-dose had a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 72%, while CT with low-dose had a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 81%. CONCLUSION: Low kV and mA scans, as used in this study according to scanner manufacturer's global recommendations, may significantly lower exposure levels. However, these scans are significantly inferior in the detection of several individual CT findings of COVID-19 pneumonia, particularly the ones with GGO. Therefore, they should not be used as the protocol of choice in the initial imaging of COVID-19 patients during which higher sensitivity is required.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Middle Aged , Radiation Dosage , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
15.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0255045, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1319524

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Cardiovascular comorbidity anticipates severe progression of COVID-19 and becomes evident by coronary artery calcification (CAC) on low-dose chest computed tomography (LDCT). The purpose of this study was to predict a patient's obligation of intensive care treatment by evaluating the coronary calcium burden on the initial diagnostic LDCT. METHODS: Eighty-nine consecutive patients with parallel LDCT and positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 were included from three centers. The primary endpoint was admission to ICU, tracheal intubation, or death in the 22-day follow-up period. CAC burden was represented by the Agatston score. Multivariate logistic regression was modeled for prediction of the primary endpoint by the independent variables "Agatston score > 0", as well as the CT lung involvement score, patient sex, age, clinical predictors of severe COVID-19 progression (history of hypertension, diabetes, prior cardiovascular event, active smoking, or hyperlipidemia), and laboratory parameters (creatinine, C-reactive protein, leucocyte, as well as thrombocyte counts, relative lymphocyte count, d-dimer, and lactate dehydrogenase levels). RESULTS: After excluding multicollinearity, "Agatston score >0" was an independent regressor within multivariate analysis for prediction of the primary endpoint (p<0.01). Further independent regressors were creatinine (p = 0.02) and leucocyte count (p = 0.04). The Agatston score was significantly higher for COVID-19 cases which completed the primary endpoint (64.2 [interquartile range 1.7-409.4] vs. 0 [interquartile range 0-0]). CONCLUSION: CAC scoring on LDCT might help to predict future obligation of intensive care treatment at the day of patient admission to the hospital.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Calcinosis/complications , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/complications , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Disease Progression , Radiography, Thoracic , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prognosis , Radiation Dosage
17.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 22(8): 219-229, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1293131

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To conserve personal protective equipment (PPE) and reduce exposure to potentially infected COVID-19 patients, several Californian facilities independently implemented a method of acquiring portable chest radiographs through glass barriers that was originally developed by the University of Washington. METHODS: This work quantifies the transmission of radiation through a glass barrier using six radiographic systems at five facilities. Patient entrance air kerma (EAK) and effective dose were estimated both with and without the glass barrier. Beam penetrability and resulting exposure index (EI) and deviation index (DI) were measured and used to adjust the tube current-time product (mAs) for glass barriers. Because of beam hardening, the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was measured with image quality phantoms to ensure diagnostic integrity. Finally, scatter surveys were performed to assess staff radiation exposure both inside and outside the exam room. RESULTS: The glass barriers attenuated a mean of 61% of the normal X-ray beams. When the mAs was increased to match EI values, there was no discernible degradation of image quality as determined by the CNR. This was corroborated with subjective assessments of image quality by chest radiologists. The glass-hardened beams acted as a filter for low energy X-rays, and some facilities observed slight changes in patient effective doses. There was scattering from both the phantoms and the glass barriers within the room. CONCLUSIONS: Glass barriers require an approximate 2.5 times increase in beam intensity, with all other technique factors held constant. Further refinements are necessary for increased source-to-image distance and beam quality in order to adequately match EI values. This does not result in a significant increase in the radiation dose delivered to the patient. The use of lead aprons, mobile shields, and increased distance from scattering sources should be employed where practicable in order to keep staff radiation doses as low as reasonably achievable.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Consensus , Humans , Phantoms, Imaging , Radiation Dosage , Radiography, Thoracic , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 194(2-3): 135-143, 2021 Jul 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1276231

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the ionizing radiation exposure in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study in which all patients presented with suggestive symptoms of COVID-19 were included. The study was carried out in a university-affiliated private hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. Biological radiation dose exposure (cumulative effective dose: CED) was evaluated in millisievert (mSv) units. RESULTS: A total of 1410 patients were included in the study. Of all study subjects, 804 patients (57%) underwent only one chest computed tomography (CT) procedure. Six hundred and six patients (43%) had two or more chest CT procedures. Median CED was 6.02 (min-max:1.67-16.27) mSv. The number of patients who were exposed to ≤ 5 mSv were 149 (24.6%), whereas 457 patients (75.4%) were exposed to >5 mSv. CONCLUSION: The radiation exposure in COVID-19 patients seems unjustifiably high. Awareness should be increased as to the proper use of chest CT in COVID-19 as per to the society recommendations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Radiation Exposure , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Radiation, Ionizing , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Turkey/epidemiology
20.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(21): e26034, 2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1242121

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: To determine the role of ultra-low dose chest computed tomography (uld CT) compared to chest radiographs in patients with laboratory-confirmed early stage SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.Chest radiographs and uld CT of 12 consecutive suspected SARS-CoV-2 patients performed up to 48 hours from hospital admission were reviewed by 2 radiologists. Dosimetry and descriptive statistics of both modalities were analyzed.On uld CT, parenchymal abnormalities compatible with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were detected in 10/12 (83%) patients whereas on chest X-ray in, respectively, 8/12 (66%) and 5/12 (41%) patients for reader 1 and 2. The average increment of diagnostic performance of uld CT compared to chest X-ray was 29%. The average effective dose was, respectively, of 0.219 and 0.073 mSv.Uld CT detects substantially more lung injuries in symptomatic patients with suspected early stage SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia compared to chest radiographs, with a significantly better inter-reader agreement, at the cost of a slightly higher equivalent radiation dose.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Radiography, Thoracic/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Predictive Value of Tests , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Radiation Dosage , Radiography, Thoracic/adverse effects , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Radiometry/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/adverse effects , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL