The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

Introduction

This assessment aims to demonstrate whether the routine CT protocols at Alkharj Medical Center (AMC) in Saudi Arabia are optimized or not. It also focuses on the best methods of lessening radiation does. The assessment makes a comparison between the AMC protocols against standard protocols provided by the Ministry of Health (MOH) in Saudi Arabia. After a comparison of protocol tables, the assessment explores the available literature to provide accounts of changes in scanning parameters, how such changes have affected patients, a dose of radiation, and the quality of imaging.

CT scanning protocols of head

1.1 CT scanning protocols of head
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and Laterallateral only
Scan rangeFrom base of the skull to the vertexFrom base of the skull to the vertex
Patient positionSupine with head on head restSupine with head on head rest
Detectors64×1.250 mm24×1.2mm (sequential mode)
64×0.6 mm (spiral mode)
Beam collimation1.250 mm1.2 mm and/or 0.6 mm
Gantry rotation time1.0 second (Sequential mode)2.5 second (Sequential mode)
1.0 second (Spiral mode)
Slice width5 mm4.8 mm for sequential mode
5 mm for spiral mode
Increment for spiral modeSequential scan5 mm
Contrast medium50 ml Omnipaque 35050 ml Omnipaque 350
Injection rate2ml/second automatic injectionHand injection
Delay time3-5 minutes60 seconds
kVp120-140120
mAsModulated380 (Effective mAs)

High resolution CT of chest (HRCT)

1.2 High resolution CT of chest (HRCT)
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and LateralAP only
Scan rangeApex of lung to diaphragmApex of lung to diaphragm
Patient positionSupine and arms on head restSupine and arms on head rest
Detectors64×0.62564×0.6
Beam collimation0.625 mm0.6 mm
Gantry rotation time0.5 second0.5 second
Slice width1.250 mm lung window5 mm0.7 mm reconstruction
IV contrastNoneNone
Oral contrastNoneNone
kVp120120
mAsModulated120 (Effective mAs)

CT scanning protocols of CTA (pulmonary embolism)

1.3 CT scanning protocols of CTA (pulmonary embolism)
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and LateralAP only
Scan rangeFrom diaphragm to the lower neckFrom diaphragm to 3cm above aortic arch
Patient positionSupine with patient’s feet firstSupine with patient’s arms on head rest
Detectors64×0.625 mm64×0.6 mm
Beam collimation0.65 mm0.6 mm
Gantry rotation time0.65 second0.33 second
Slice width2.5 mm and 0.625 mm reconstruction5 mm and 0.7 mm reconstruction
Pitch0.984 mm0.9 mm
Oral contrastNoneNone
IV contrast80 ml Omnipaque 350 + 20 ml saline80-100 ml Omnipaque 350
Injection rate4.5 ml/second4 ml/second
Delay time15 seconds + Test bolus15-20 seconds / 100 HU triggering level
kVp100100
mAsModulated130 (Effective mAs)
Bismuth shieldsYesNone

CT scanning protocols of liver

1.4 CT scanning protocols of liver
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and LateralAP only
Scan rangePortal venous phase: Whole abdomen.Non contrast: Liver
Arterial phase: Liver
Venous phase: Whole abdomen
Patient positionSupine feet firstSupine with arms on head rest
Detectors640.625 mmNon contrast: 24×1.2 mm
Arterial phase: 64×0.6 mm
Venous phase: 24×1.2 mm
Beam collimationVenous phase: 2.5mmNon contrast: 1.2mm
Arterial phase: 0.6mm
Venous phase: 1.2mm
Gantry rotation time0.6 second0.5 second
Slice width2.5 mm with 0.625 mm for reconstruction5 mm with 1 mm for reconstruction
Pitch1.375 mm1.4 mm
Delay timeBolus trackingArterial phase: 25 seconds
Venous phase: 75 seconds
Or bolus tracking (100 HU)
kVp120120
mAsModulated200 (Effective mAs)
Bismuth shieldsYesNone
Image orderCraniocaudalCraniocaudal
Oral contrast1000 cc water over 20 mins1000 cc water over 20 mins
IV contrast concentration (mg/ml)350350
IV contrast volume (cc)100-120 cc of Omnipaque 350100-120 cc of Omnipaque 350
IV contrast injection rate (cc/s)3-4 cc/sec3-4 cc/sec
Scan delay (fixed or bolus tracking)25 sec arterial / 50-60 venous25 sec arterial / 50-60 venous
Saline chaser (cc)30 (optional)30 (optional)
3D Technique usedVRT / MIP using inSpace onlyVRT / MIP using inSpace only
Phase typeNon-contrastArterialVenousNon-contrastArterialVenous
kVp120120120120120120
Effective mAs140160140200200200
Rotation time (sec)0.50.50.50.50.50.5
Slice thickness (mm)5.05.05.00.750.750.75
Detector collimation (mm)1.50.751.50.750.750.75
Feed / Scan (mm)24.09.024.012.012.012.0
KernelB31fB31fB31fB30fB30fB30
Increment (mm)0.50.50.50.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.75

CT scanning protocols of pancreas

1.5 CT scanning protocols of pancreas
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and LateralAP only
Scan rangeWhole abdomenMid stomach to iliac crest
Patient positionSupine with feet firstSupine with arms on head rest
Detectors64×0.625 mmNon contrast: 24×1.2 mm
Arterial phase: 64×0.6 mm
Venous phase: 24×1.2 mm
Beam collimationNon contrast: 5 mm
Arterial phase: 0.625 mm
Venous phase: 2.5 mm
Non contrast: 1.2mm
Arterial phase: 0.6mm
Venous phase: 1.2mm
Gantry rotation time0.6 second0.5 second
Slice width2.5 mm5 mm with 1 mm for reconstruction
Pitch0.984 mm1.4 mm
kVp140120
mAsModulated200 (Effective mAs)
Bismuth shieldsYesNone
Image orderCraniocaudalCraniocaudal
Reconstruction algorithmSoft tissue (B31f)Soft tissue (B20f)
Oral contrast1000 cc water over 20 mins1000 cc water over 20 mins
IV contrast concentration (mg/ml)350350
IV contrast volume (cc)120 cc of Omnipaque 350100-120 cc of Omnipaque 350
IV contrast injection rate (cc/s)3-4 cc/sec3-4 cc/sec
Scan delay (fixed or bolus tracking)Arterial phase: 30 seconds
Venous phase: 70 seconds
Arterial phase: 25 seconds
Venous phase: 75 seconds
Or bolus tracking with 100 HU triggering level
Saline chaser (cc)40 (optional)40 (optional)
3D Technique usedVRT / MIP using InSpaceVRT / MIP using InSpace only
Phase typeNon-contrastArterialVenousNon-contrastArterialVenous
kVp120120120120120120
Effective mAs140160140200200200
Rotation time (sec)0.50.50.50.50.50.5
Slice thickness (mm)5.05.05.00.750.750.75
Detector collimation (mm)1.50.751.50.750.750.75
Feed / Scan (mm)24.09.024.012.012.012.0
KernelB31fB31fB31fB30fB30fB30
Increment (mm)0.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.750.5 – 0.75
Reconstruction interval (mm)5×51×0.751×0.755×53×3 & 1×0.82×2

CT scanning protocols of kidneys

1.6 CT scanning protocols of kidneys
SCGHSMC
TopogramAP and LateralAP only
Scan rangeWhole abdomenWhole abdomen
Patient positionSupine with feet firstSupine with head first
Detectors64×0.62564×0.6
Beam collimation0.625 mm0.6 mm
Gantry rotation time0.8 second0.5 second
Slice width2.5 mm
0.625 mm for reconstruction
5 mm
1 mm for reconstruction
Pitch1.375 mm1.4 mm
Contrast mediumNoneNone
kVp120120
mAsModulated200 (Effective mAs)
Bismuth shieldsYesNone
Reconstruction algorithmSoft tissue (B20f)Soft tissue (B20f)
Oral contrast1000 cc water over 20 mins1000 cc water over 20 mins
IV contrast concentration (mg/ml)350350
IV contrast volume (cc)100-120 cc of Omnipaque 350100-120 cc of Omnipaque 350
IV contrast injection rate (cc/s)3-4 cc/sec3-4 cc/sec
Scan delay (fixed or bolus tracking)25 sec arterial / 50-55 sec venous /
240 sec excretory phase
25 sec arterial / 50-55 sec venous /
240 sec excretory phase
Saline chaser (cc)VRT / MIP using InSpace only
3D Technique usedVRT / MIP using InSpace only
Phase typeNon-contrastArterialVenousDelayNon-contrastArterialVenousDelay
kVp120120120120120120120120
Effective mAs140160140140200200200200
Rotation time (sec)0.50.50.50.50.50.50.50.5
Slice thickness (mm)5.05.05.05.00.750.750.750.75
Detector collimation (mm)1.50.751.51.50.750.750.750.75
Feed / Scan (mm)24.09.024.024.012.012.012.012.0
KernelB31fB31fB31fB31fB30fB30B30B30
Increment (mm)5.05.05.05.05.05.05.05.0
Reconstruction interval (mm)3×31×0.751×0.753×33×33×3 & 1×0.73×33×3

Head CT

Not many studies exist in the area of lowering the dose for CT of the head. Therefore, the lack of past studies in this field presented challenges because the assessment aimed to compare practices and the standard protocols. Cohen et al. (2000) conducted a study on the image quality changes on CT scan of the head by applying a formalin-fixed cadaver. These researchers reduced the radiation dose by reducing both mAs and kVp on two separate CT machines.

They used both helical scanning mode and the conventional sequential mode. Some researchers evaluated the subjective quality of the image, but they did not note any differences in image quality from different scans performed at the range of 60 percent to 100 percent. The sequential model had a standard mode of (135 kVp + 270 mAs) and (130 kVp + 315 mAs) for two various scanners while the sequential mode had (120 kVp + 185 mAs) and (130 kVp + 157 mAs) for helical scanning.

The researchers noted a linear inverse relationship between the dose and image noise. The study only concentrated on a broad assessment of the subjective quality of the image of a cadaver head without any relation to clinical conditions. Cohen et al. noted that scans produced with a dose that was “more than 50% reduced in comparison with standard settings were considered not interpretable” (Cohnen et al. 2000).

Another study used a 4-MDCT helical CT examination of the head for regular indications. It used the setting of 140 kV, 170 mAs with a scan of one second, and a pitch factor of 0.75 CT dose index weight (CTDIw) with 65 millygray (mGy). The scan was performed a few times by using four images of 5mm thick images at 90 mAs (CTDIw of 34 mGy. There were also similar parameters at four levels:

  • Posterior fossa
  • Middle cranial fossa
  • Corona radiate
  • Centrum semiovale

The reduction at these four levels was 47 percent. However, the difference between GM and WM was not significantly conspicuous between the two-dose groups. The major GM contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was 22% higher in the 170-mAs group. This was statistically significant and considered acceptable diagnostic image quality with a good resolution despite the noise. Some neuro-radiologists believe that it is normal for patients to undergo several CT scans of the head for a certain period based on the degree of the illness in a hospital that has an active neurological intensive care unit and a stroke unit.

These scans usually show gross imaging findings. However, they can influence management decisions when dealing with traumatic or non-traumatic hemorrhage aneurysm rupture, stroke, and hydrocephalus.

Children and other young patients had significant variations between scans with a CTDIw with 65 mGy and of 34 mGy, particularly with repeated scans within a short time. However, a low-dose technique was not suitable for an initial workup because it lacked scientific studies to support its ability to detect subtle pathology (e.g. lacunar infarctions) correctly. Objective measurements did not indicate any significant difference in GM-WM conspicuity in standard and low-dose images with a reduction of about 50 percent. Mullins et al. (2004) note that such differences have subtle distinctions about Hounsfield units than the conspicuity in most lesions.

Britten and colleagues (2004) also concluded a similar result. They worked with spatially correlated statistical noise to standard CT images of the head to replicate a reduction in exposure by up to 50 percent among 23 elderly patients. These researchers simulated images at 300, 260, and 210 mAs by using 120 kV and 420 mAs during the initial scan. They also used periventricular with low-density lesions to act as an indicator of the effect of simulated dose reduction on the precision of the diagnosis.

However, this was not reduced significantly relative to 210-mAs images or about 50 percent dose reduction. They also used visualization of the internal capsule to measure the quality of the image, but this was low in terms of dose image. The low number of research population that participates in the study generally reduces sensitivity (in this case n = 22 and 23).

Gündogdu et al. (2005) analyzed the impact of different tube current settings to enhance the quality of the image and dose for adult head CT among 60 patients. They studied posterior fossa, basal ganglia, and centrum semiovale with aim of reviewing subjective image and noise quality indicators and noise measurements. There was no poor quality score at the level of 50 percent decrease in dose protocol with an initial CTDI of 58.2 mGy for the posterior fossa and 48 mGy for the supra-tentorial. However, a further change at a 60% decrease in dose protocol resulted in a high poor quality score, particularly in the posterior fossa.

These three recent studies show that it is clinically possible to reduce the dose for standard head CT examinations. Moreover, even a reduction in dose by 50 percent did not have any significant effect on the quality of the image. However, these studies focused only on morphological normal anatomical brain areas, but the issue of how much resolution of low-contrast lesions will be affected by low-dose protocols remains unresolved. The eye lens is of importance in the CT of the brain because researchers have investigated and documented cataract formation. According to Heaney and Norvill (2006), the use of various scan planes (with different gantry angulation) to avoid orbits reduces the eye lens dose by 88 percent. This reduction does not have any impact on the severity of posterior fossa artifacts or the hardening of the beam by petrous bones.

X-ray fluency affects the image quality of the CT. As a result, adults and children (young patients) should have different techniques in pediatric CT because young patients attenuate few X-rays. This suggests that physicians can achieve the same image quality by using reduced dose levels. Still, children CT in pediatric use low energy than adults because of small mass and the long-expected lifetime results in the higher dose for children than in adults for the same CT examination (Huda, Walter and Awais 2007).

Siegel and other authors (2004) note that a lower tube current can be effective for maintaining the image quality. Some studies (Shah et al., 2005) have shown that differences in image quality do not occur by using 140 kV and 180–240 mA or a lower dose at 90–130 mA. Still, a reduction between 45% and 50% tube current does not have any significant impact on the quality of the image, and readers have confidence with the available information for making diagnosis decisions. Some researchers propose the use of the maximum anteroposterior diameter of the child’s head (Wong et al., 2001). This can serve as a good standard for measuring tube current at the start of the examination.

On the other hand, Boone et al. (2003) have proposed a significant reduction in dose in the smallest children due to the variations in the patient’s thickness and X-ray attenuation. Children’s bones are less thick and dense. Therefore, it is only reasonable to use a low dose and tube voltage in children. For instance, a reduction from 120 to 80 kV results in a dose reduction of 75%. However, children and infants can use 100 kV on the head CT sufficiently (Siegel et al. 2004).

Conclusion

Elkhart Medical Center (AMC) used various parameters for every protocol. Moreover, it was difficult to make a comparison with the recommended protocol from the MOH identified in the table. For instance, reconstruction measurements differed for both protocols. However, AMC had a slightly high width than the MOH protocols. They also had different detector configurations. Moreover, AMC had high pitch than the MOH pitch protocol. On gantry rotation time, AMC protocols were less than the MOH protocols except for the head protocol (2.5 seconds for AMC and 1.0 seconds for MOH).

It was also difficult to make a comparison between the mAs of both institutions because of the variations in techniques used. The MOH standard proposes the use of modulated mAs, and AMC should use efficient mAs for their protocols. Conversely, kVp protocols were almost the same for all the hospitals. The MOH used Bismuth shields in scans while AMC did not use the shield in scans.

Overall, users can adjust most of the CT scan parameters. However, any change in parameters affects the radiation dose. Users can control these parameters to reduce the dose and enhance the quality of the image to an optimum diagnostic level.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, April 6). The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-routine-ct-protocols-at-alkharj-medical-center-in-saudi-arabia/

Work Cited

"The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia." IvyPanda, 6 Apr. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/the-routine-ct-protocols-at-alkharj-medical-center-in-saudi-arabia/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia'. 6 April.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia." April 6, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-routine-ct-protocols-at-alkharj-medical-center-in-saudi-arabia/.

1. IvyPanda. "The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia." April 6, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-routine-ct-protocols-at-alkharj-medical-center-in-saudi-arabia/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "The Routine CT Protocols at Alkharj Medical Center in Saudi Arabia." April 6, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-routine-ct-protocols-at-alkharj-medical-center-in-saudi-arabia/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
1 / 1