Could the thorax CT protocol be designed based on neck circumference?

Aim: To evaluate whether neck circumference (NC) is an appropriate somatometric parameter for determining tube voltage of thoraxCT for avoiding unnecessary radiation dose.Matetial and Methods: One hundred sixty-three patients who underwent unenhanced thorax CT were included in the study. The NC,body weight and height were measured and the body mass index (BMI) was calculated. The patients were divided into two groupsbefore CT examination: In group 1, the different kV values based on neck circumferences were used on CT protocol, however thesame kV value was used for all patients in group 2. Both group CT images were evaluated visually and numerically.Results: The effective dose showing radiation received by the patient was lower in Group 1 than the Group 2 (p

PDF

___

1. Krumholz HM, Wang Y, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med 2009;361:849–57.
2. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. UNSCEAR 2000 report to the general assembly, Annex D: medical radiation exposure. New York: United Nations; 2000.
3. Brenner Dj, Hall EJ. Computed tomography-an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84.
4. Aweda MA, Arogundade RA. Patient dose reduction methods in computerized tomography procedures: a review. Int J Phys Sci 2007;245:1–9.
5. Kalender WA, Buchenau S, Deak P, et al. Technical approaches to the optimization of CT. Phys Med 2008;24:71–9.
6. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004; 230:619–28.
7. McCollough CH. Automatic exposure control in CT: are we done yet? Radiology 2005;237:755–6.
8. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, et al: Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med 2009;361:849–57.
9. Walton C, Lees B, Crook D, et al. Body fat distribution, rather than overall adiposity, influences serum lipids and lipoproteins in healthy men independently of age. Am J Med 1995;99:459–64.
10. Hosch W, Stiller W, Mueller D, et al. Reduction of radiation exposure and improvement of image quality with BMIadapted prospective cardiac computed tomography and iterative reconstruction. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:3568-76.
11. Shah A, Das P, Subkovas E, Buch AN, et al. Radiation dose during coronary angiogram: relation to body mass index. Heart Lung Circ 2015;24:21-5.
12. Ghoshhajra BB, Engel LC, Major GP, et al. Direct chest area measurement: a potential anthropometric replacement for BMI to inform cardiac CT dose parameters? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2011;5:240-246.
13. Li JL, Liu H, Huang MP, et al. Potentially optimal body size to adjust tube current for individualized radiation dose control in retrospective ECG-Triggered 256-Slice CT coronary angiography. Hellenic J Cardiol 2014;55:393-401.
14. Kissebah AH, Krakower GR. Regional adiposity and morbidity. Physiol Rev 1994;74:761–811.
15. Saka M, Türker P, Ercan A, et al. Is neck circumference measurement an indicator for abdominal obesity? A pilot study on Turkish Adults. Afr Health Sci 2014;14:570-5.
16. Nafiu OO, Burke C, Lee J, et al. Neck Circumference as a Screening Measure for Identifying Children With High Body Mass Index. Pediatrics 2010;126:306.
17. Zen V, Fuchs FD, Wainstein MV, et al. Neck circumference and central obesity are independent predictors of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Am J Cardiovasc Dis 2012;2:323-30.
18. Li HX, Zhang F, Zhao D, et al. Neck circumference as a measure of neck fat and abdominal visceral fat in Chinese adults. BMC Public Health 2014;14:311.
19. Preis SR, Massaro JM, Hoffmann U, et al. Neck circumference as a novel measure of cardiometabolic risk: the Framingham Heart study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010;95:3701–10.
20. Fox CS, Massaro JM, Hoffmann U, et al. Abdominal visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue compartments: association with metabolic risk factors in the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2007;116:39–48.