Establecimiento de Niveles Locales de Referencia Diagnóstica para TC de Cabeza Pediátrica en un Hospital Terciario Sudafricano

Autores

  • Mpumelelo Nyathi Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University image/svg+xml
    • Autherlia Dimpho Rinkie Mosiame Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University image/svg+xml

      DOI:

      https://doi.org/10.15392/2319-0612.2026.3059

      Palavras-chave:

      pediatric CT, radiation dose optimization, dose length product (DLP), computed tomography

      Resumo

      La tomografía computarizada (TC) proporciona imágenes tridimensionales rápidas y de alta resolución, reduciendo los artefactos por movimiento y la necesidad de sedación en pacientes pediátricos. Sin embargo, los niños son altamente sensibles a la radiación ionizante debido al desarrollo de sus tejidos y a su mayor esperanza de vida. Este estudio propuso niveles locales de referencia diagnóstica (LDRLs) para exámenes de TC de cabeza pediátrica en un hospital terciario de Sudáfrica (SA). Se realizó una revisión retrospectiva de los datos del producto dosis-longitud (DLP) y del índice volumétrico de dosis en tomografía computarizada (CTDIvol) obtenidos entre enero de 2023 y marzo de 2024. Los exámenes se clasificaron en cuatro grupos etarios: <1 año, 1 – <5 años, 5 – <10 años y 10 – 15 años. Para cada grupo, se calcularon los valores medianos de DLP y CTDIvol como LDRLs y posteriormente se compararon con valores internacionales. Los LDRLs propuestos en términos de DLP (mGy.cm) fueron 242.6; 405.5; 715.5 y 899.3, mientras que en términos de CTDIvol (mGy) fueron 13.8; 15.8; 26.0 y 38.7 respectivamente para los grupos etarios <1 año; 1 – <5 años; 5 – <10 años y 10 – 15 años. El DLP para SA (242.6) superó al de Brasil (143.8), pero fue inferior al de Nigeria (1040.0) en el grupo <1 año. Para el grupo de 1 – <5 años, el DLP de SA (405.5) fue menor que el de Nigeria (988.0), aunque superior al de Irán (216.9). En el grupo de 5 – <10 años, el DLP de SA (715.5) superó al de Irán (232.8), pero permaneció inferior al de Nigeria (1493.0). Para el grupo de 10 – 15 años, el DLP de SA (899.3) superó los valores de Omán (391.0) y Brasil (531.7), aunque permaneció inferior al de Nigeria (1824.0). En cuanto al CTDIvol (mGy), para el grupo <1 año, el valor de SA (13.8) superó los valores de Brasil (8.8) y Omán (13.0). Para el grupo de 1 – <5 años, el valor de SA (15.8) fue inferior al de Arabia Saudita (22.0). Para el grupo de 5 – <10 años, el valor de SA (26.0) superó el valor de Omán (19.0), pero permaneció inferior al de Arabia Saudita (29.0). Para el grupo de 10 – 15 años, el valor de SA (38.7) superó los valores de Brasil (26.9) y Omán (21.0), aunque permaneció inferior al valor de Irlanda (52.1). Las dosis de TC pediátrica en el hospital terciario sudafricano propuesto se encuentran dentro de los rangos globales. Sin embargo, los valores más altos observados en los grupos <1, 5 – <10 y 10 – 15 años en comparación con algunos valores internacionales indican la posibilidad de optimización adicional.

      Downloads

      Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

      Referências

      [1] IMPACTSCAN. CT History. [S. l.]: Impactscan, [s. d.]. Disponível em: http://www.impactscan.org/CThistory.htm. Acesso em: 6 ago. 2023.

      [2] GRICIENE, B. B.; SIUKSTERYTE, M. Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Paediatric Head CT Procedures. Acta Medica Lituanica, Lithuania, v. 28, n. 2, p. 253-261, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Amed.2021.28.2.13

      [3] MAHARJAN, S. et al. Knowledge of Radiation Protection among Radiology Professionals and Students: A medical college-based study. European Journal of Radiology Open, Netherlands, v. 7, p. 100287, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100287

      [4] CÉLIER, D. et al. Multicentre survey on patient dose in paediatric imaging and proposal for updated diagnostic reference levels for France. Part 1: Computed Tomography. European Radiology, Austria, v. 30, n. 2, p. 1156–1165, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06405-3

      [5] DORFMAN, A. L.; FAZEL, R.; EINSTEIN, A. J. [Artigo sem título impresso]. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Chicago, IL, v. 165, n. 5, p. 458-464, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.270

      [6] YOSHIDA, K. et al. Changes in radiological imaging frequencies in children before and after the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. Japanese Journal of Radiology, Japan, v. 33, n. 10, p. 619–626, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-015-0464-8

      [7] ICRP. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiological Protection and Safety in Medicine: ICRP publication 73. Annals of the ICRP, Oxford, v. 26, n. 2, p. 1–4, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6453(00)89195-2

      [8] ALREHILY, F. Diagnostic reference levels in radiographic and CT examinations in Saudi Arabia: A systematic Review. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, Oxford, v. 198, n. 19, p. 1451-1461, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncac183

      [9] AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT: Report no. 96. College Park: AAPM, 2008. p. 1-96.

      [10] AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE. Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations: Report no. 204. College Park (MD): AAPM, 2011.

      [11] AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE. Use of water equivalent diameter for calculating patient size and size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in CT: Report no. 220. College Park (MD): AAPM, 2014.

      [12] AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE. The use of size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) for CT dose optimization and monitoring: Report no. 293. College Park (MD): AAPM, 2019.

      [13] ABDOU, S. E. et al. National Diagnostic reference levels for pediatric computed tomography in Egypt. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, United Kingdom, v. 198, n. 70, p. 423-433, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncac069

      [14] ICRP. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Diagnostic reference levels of medical imaging: ICRP publication 135. Annals of the ICRP, Oxford, v. 46, n. 1, p. 1–144, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146645317717209

      [15] TREIER, R. et al. Patient Doses in CT Examinations in Switzerland: Implementation of National Diagnostic Reference Levels. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, United Kingdom, v. 142, n. 2-4, p. 244-254, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq279

      [16] PLOUSSI, A. et al. Local diagnostic reference levels in pediatric CT examinations: a survey at the largest children’s hospital in Greece. The British Journal of Radiology, United Kingdom, v. 1116, n. 93, p. 20190358, 2019. DOI: doi.org. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20190358

      [17] VASSILEVA, J.; REHANI, M. Diagnostic reference levels. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, v. 204, n. 1, p. W1–W3, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.12794

      [18] VAN DER MERWE, C. M.; MAHOMED, N. An audit of radiation doses received by pediatric patients undergoing computed tomography investigations at academic hospitals in South Africa. SA Journal of Radiology, Africa, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1823, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajr.v24i1.1823

      [19] MOHAMMADBEIGI, A. et al. Local DRLs for pediatric CT examinations based on size-specific dose estimates in Kermanshah, Iran. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, United Kingdom, p. 1-11, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncz056

      [20] GUIMARAES, A. et al. In vivo measurements in pediatric computed tomography with TLD: A correlation between CDTI values. Radiation Measurements, England, v. 177, p. 107275, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2024.107275

      [21] BOUCHAREB, Y. et al. Establishing Diagnostic Reference Levels for Paediatric CT Imaging: A Multi-Centre Study. Healthcare, Basel, Switzerland, v. 13, p. 1728, 2025. Disponível em: doi.org. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13141728

      [22] MUHAMMAND, N. A. et al. Diagnostic reference Levels of Radiation Dose and Image Quality among Pediatric CT Examinations in A Tertiary Hospital in Malaysia. Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland, v. 10, p. 591, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10080591

      [23] RAWASHDEH, M. et al. Diagnostic reference levels for paediatric CT in Jordan. Journal of Radiological Protection, United Kingdom, v. 39, n. 4, p. 1060, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ab3ee2

      [24] EKPO, E. U.; ADEJOH, T.; ERIM, A. E. Dose benchmarks for paediatric head computed tomography examination in Nigeria. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, v. 185, n. 4, p. 464-471, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncz036

      [25] ALHAILIY, A. et al. Reporting Diagnostic Reference Levels for Paediatric Patients Undergoing Brain Computed Tomography. Tomography, Basel, Switzerland, v. 9, n. 6, p. 2029-2038, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography9060159

      [26] RAWASHDEH, M. et al. A new approach to dose reference levels in pediatric CT: Age and size-specific dose estimation. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, v. 205, p. 110698, 2022. DOI: doi.org. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110698

      [27] HAMAD, M. S. A. et al. Assessment of diagnostic reference levels for pediatric cardiac patients computed tomography in accordance with European guidelines. Radiation and Environmental Biophysics, Germany, v. 62, n. 2, p. 331-338, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-023-01031-6

      [28] KANAL, K. M. US Diagnostic Reference Levels and Achievable Doses for 10 Pediatric Examinations. Radiology, v. 300, n. 1, p. 1-11, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021211241

      [29] STRAUSS, K. J. et al. Radiation dose for pediatric CT versus adult imaging facility. Radiology, Netherlands, v. 291, n. 1, p. 158-167, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019181753

      [30] XU, H. et al. Results and analysis of examination doses for paediatric CT procedures based on a nationwide survey in China. European Radiology, Austria, v. 34, n. 3, p. 1659-1666, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10005-7

      [31] ALMUQBIL, N. et al. Precision in Practice: Clinical Indication-Specific DRLs for Head CT for Advanced Personalised Dose Benchmarking. Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland, v. 15, p. 1849, 2025. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15151849. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15151849

      Downloads

      Publicado

      19-06-2026

      Declaração de Disponibilidade de Dados

      Raw data is available from the author at a reasonable request

      Edição

      Seção

      Artigos Originais