Skip to main content
Log in

Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey

  • Physics
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multi-slice (MS) technology increases the efficacy of CT procedures and offers new promising applications. The expanding use of MSCT, however, may result in an increase in both frequency of procedures and levels of patient exposure. It was, therefore, the aim of this study to gain an overview of MSCT examinations conducted in Germany in 2001. All MSCT facilities were requested to provide information about 14 standard examinations with respect to scan parameters and frequency. Based on this data, dosimetric quantities were estimated using an experimentally validated formalism. Results are compared with those of a previous survey for single-slice (SS) spiral CT scanners. According to the data provided for 39 dual- and 73 quad-slice systems, the average annual number of patients examined at MSCT is markedly higher than that examined at SSCT scanners (5500 vs 3500). The average effective dose to patients was changed from 7.4 mSv at single-slice to 5.5 mSv and 8.1 mSv at dual- and quad-slice scanners, respectively. There is a considerable potential for dose reduction at quad-slice systems by an optimisation of scan protocols and better education of the personnel. To avoid an increase in the collective effective dose from CT procedures, a clear medical justification is required in each case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1a, b.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock O (1990) Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and scanner rotation. Radiology 176:181–183

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Liang Y, Kruger RA (1996) Dual-slice spiral versus single-slice spiral scanning: comparison of the physical performance of two computed tomography scanners. Med Phys 23:205–220

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Klingenbeck-Regn K, Schaller S, Flohr T, Ohnesorge B, Kopp AF, Baum U (1999) Subsecond multi-slice computed tomography: basics and applications. Eur J Radiol 31:110–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fuchs TO, Kachelriess M, Kalender WA (2000) System performance of multislice spiral computed tomography. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 19:63–70

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fuchs T, Kachelriess M, Kalender WA (2000) Technical advances in multi-slice spiral CT. Eur J Radiol 36:69–73

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rubin GD (2000) Data explosion: the challenge of multidetector-row CT. Eur J Radiol 36:74–80

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dawson P, Lees WR (2001) Multi-slice technology in computed tomography. Clin Radiol 56:302–309

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rydberg J, Buckalter KA, Caldemeyer KS, Phillips MD, Conces DJ, Aisen AM, Persohn SA, Kopecky KK (2000) Multisection CT: scanning techniques and clinical applications. Radiographics 20:1787–1806

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Berland LL, Smith JK (1998) Multidetector-array CT: once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology 209:327–329

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kopecky KK, Buckwalter KA, Sokiranski R (1999) Multi-slice CT: spirals past single-slice CT in diagnostic efficacy. Diagn Imaging 21:36–42

    Google Scholar 

  11. Knez A, Becker CR, Leber A, Ohnesorge B, Becker A, White C, Haberl R, Reiser MF, Steinbeck G (2001) Usefulness of multislice spiral computed tomography angiography for determination of coronary artery stenoses. Am J Cardiol 88:1191–1194

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nieman K, Rensing BJ, van Geuns RJ, Munne A, Ligthart JM, Pattynama PM, Krestin GP, Serruys PW, de Feyter PJ (2002) Usefulness of multislice computed tomography for detecting obstructive coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 89:913–918

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schroeder S, Kopp AF, Ohnesorge B, Loke-Gie H, Kuettner A, Baumbach A, Herdeg C, Claussen CD, Karsch KR (2002) Virtual coronary angioscopy using multislice computed tomography. Heart 87:205–209

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gerber TC, Kuzo RS, Karstaedt N, Lane GE, Morin RL, Sheedy PF, Safford RE, Blackshear JL, Pietan JH (2002) Current results and new developments of coronary angiography with use of contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the heart. Mayo Clin Proc 77:55–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hong C, Becker CR, Schoepf UJ, Ohnesorge B, Bruening R, Reiser MF (2002) Coronary artery calcium: absolute quantification in nonenhanced and contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT studies. Radiology 223:474–480

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bruzzi JF, Moss AC, Fenlon HM (2001) Clinical results of virtual colonoscopy. Eur Radiol 11:2188–2194

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Luboldt W, Fletcher JG, Vogl TJ (2002) Colonography: current status, research directions and challenges. Update 2002. Eur Radiol 12:502–524

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. UNSCEAR (2000) 2000 report, vol I. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. Annex D: Medical radiation exposures. United Nations Sales Publications

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. Jahresbericht 2000. http://www.bfs.de

  20. European Commission (1999) Report EUR 16262 EN: European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography

    Google Scholar 

  21. Seifert H, Hagen T, Bartylla K, Blass G, Piepgras U (1997) Patient doses from standard and spiral CT of the head using a fast twin-beam system. Br J Radiol 70:1139–1145

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Giacomuzzi SM, Torbica P, Rieger M, Lottersberger C, Peer S, Peer R, Perkmann R, Buchberger W, Bale R, Mallouhi A, Jaschke W (2001) Evaluation of radiation exposure with single-slice and a multi-slice CT system (a phantom study). Fortschr Rontgenstr 173:643–649

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Moro L, Bolsi A, Baldi M, Bertoli G, Fantinato D (2001) Single-slice and multi-slice computerized tomography: dosimetric comparison with diagnostic reference levels. Radiol Med 102:262–265

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Galanski M, Nagel HD, Stamm G (2001) CT-Expositionspraxis in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Fortschr Rontgenstr 173:R1–R66

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nagel HD, Galanski M, Hidajat N, Maier W, Schmidt T (2000) Radiation exposure in computed tomography: fundamentals, influencing parameters, dose assessment, optimisation, scanner data, terminology. COCIR, Frankfurt

    Google Scholar 

  26. Stamm G, Nagel HD (2002) CT-Expo: ein neuartiges Programm zur Dosisevaluierung in der CT. Fortschr Rontgenstr 174:1570–1576

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. ICRP Publication 60 (1991) 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 21/1–3. Elsevier, Oxford

  28. Zankl M, Panzer W, Drexler G (1991) The calculation of dose from external photon exposures using reference human phantoms and Monte Carlo methods. Part IV. Organ doses from tomographic examinations. GSF report 30/91, Neuherberg

  29. Kramer R, Zankl M, Wiliams G, Drexler G (1982) The calculation of dose from external photon exposures using reference human phantoms and Monte Carlo methods. Part I. The male (Adam) and female (Eva) adult mathematical phantoms. GSF report S-885, Neuherberg

  30. Shrimpton PC, Jones DG, Hillier MC, Wall BF, Leheron JC, Faulkner K (1991) Survey of CT practice in the UK. Part 2. Dosimetric aspects. NRPB-249, HMSO, 48, London

  31. European Commission (2000) Report EUR 19604 EN: Recommendations for patient dosimetry in diagnostic radiology using TLD

    Google Scholar 

  32. Huda W, Sandison GA (1984) Estimation of mean organ doses in diagnostic radiology from Rando phantom measurements. Health Phys 47:463–467

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM, Boone JM (2002) The essential physics of medical imaging, 2nd edn. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia

  34. Kopp AF, Heuschmid M, Claussen CD (2002) Multidetector helical CT of the liver for tumor detection and characterization. Eur Radiol 12:745–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all respondents to our survey for their support and the staff of the eight CT facilities where phantom measurements were performed for their excellent collaboration. Furthermore, the technical support of R. Truckenbrodt (BfS, Munich, Germany) is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Brix.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brix, G., Nagel, H.D., Stamm, G. et al. Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 13, 1979–1991 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1883-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1883-y

Keywords

Navigation