Evaluation of exposure parameters in plain radiography: a comparative study with european guidelines

Typical distribution of exposure parameters in plain radiography is unknown in Portugal. This study aims to identify exposure parameters that are being used in plain radiography in the Lisbon area and to compare the collected data with European references [Commission of European Communities (CEC) guidelines]. The results show that in four examinations (skull, chest, lumbar spine and pelvis), there is a strong tendency of using exposure times above the European recommendation. The X-ray tube potential values (in kV) are below the recommended values from CEC guidelines. This study shows that at a local level (Lisbon region), radiographic practice does not comply with CEC guidelines concerning exposure techniques. Further national/local studies are recommended with the objective to improve exposure optimisation and technical procedures in plain radiography. This study also suggests the need to establish national/local diagnostic reference levels and to proceed to effective measurements for exposure optimisation.

An evaluation of SAFIRE’s potential to reduce the dose received by paediatric patients undergoing CT: a narrative review

Introduction: The purpose of this review is to gather and analyse current research publications to evaluate Sinogram-Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE). The aim of this review is to investigate whether this algorithm is capable of reducing the dose delivered during CT imaging while maintaining image quality. Recent research shows that children have a greater risk per unit dose due to increased radiosensitivity and longer life expectancies, which means it is particularly important to reduce the radiation dose received by children. Discussion: Recent publications suggest that SAFIRE is capable of reducing image noise in CT images, thereby enabling the potential to reduce dose. Some publications suggest a decrease in dose, by up to 64% compared to filtered back projection, can be accomplished without a change in image quality. However, literature suggests that using a higher SAFIRE strength may alter the image texture, creating an overly ‘smoothed’ image that lacks contrast. Some literature reports SAFIRE gives decreased low contrast detectability as well as spatial resolution. Publications tend to agree that SAFIRE strength three is optimal for an acceptable level of visual image quality, but more research is required. The importance of creating a balance between dose reduction and image quality is stressed. In this literature review most of the publications were completed using adults or phantoms, and a distinct lack of literature for paediatric patients is noted. Conclusion: It is necessary to find an optimal way to balance dose reduction and image quality. More research relating to SAFIRE and paediatric patients is required to fully investigate dose reduction potential in this population, for a range of different SAFIRE strengths.