ISSN 1004-4140
CN 11-3017/P

CARE kV技术对冠状动脉CT血管成像辐射剂量的影响

The Impact of CARE kV Technology on Radiation Dose in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography

  • 摘要: 目的:探讨CARE kV技术对冠状动脉CT血管成像(CCTA)辐射剂量的影响。方法:回顾性分析2023年12月至2024年12月于重庆医科大学附属第一医院行冠状动脉CTA(CCTA)检查的1529例患者的资料。所有检查均使用CARE kV技术,根据设备自动选择的管电压对患者进行分组。记录患者的辐射剂量数据:容积CT剂量指数(CTDIvol)、剂量长度乘积(DLP)、体型特异性剂量估计值(SSDE),基于DLP的有效剂量ED_DLP和基于蒙特卡罗模拟的有效剂量ED_Radimetrics,并以SSDE/CTDIvol、ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP表征不同剂量评价指标的差异。采用Kruskal-Wallis H检验结合Bonferroni校正进行组间比较,Spearman相关性分析评估管电压与剂量指标及比值的相关性。结果:根据实际使用的管电压将患者分为四组:70 kV组(n=815)、80 kV组(n=541)、90 kV组(n=67)、100 kV组(n=106)。各组间所有剂量指标(CTDIvol、DLP、SSDE、ED_DLP、ED_Radimetrics)及剂量比值(SSDE/CTDIvol、ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP)差异均具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。经Spearman分析,管电压与CTDIvol(rho=0.5264P < 0.05)、DLP(rho=0.4894P < 0.05)、SSDE(rho=0.5066P < 0.05)、ED_DLP(rho=0.4894P < 0.05)、ED_Radimetrics(rho=0.4626P < 0.05)呈中等正相关,与SSDE/CTDIvol呈弱负相关(rho=−0.30,P < 0.05),与ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP呈微弱正相关(rho=0.07,P < 0.05)。结论:CARE kV技术可有效降低CCTA检查的辐射剂量。该技术应用下各剂量学指标与管电压呈中等正相关,证实管电压选择是剂量控制的关键变量。常规剂量指标CTDIvol和ED_DLP系统性低估真实剂量,且低估程度与CARE kV选择的管电压的相关性较弱。推荐将SSDE和ED_Radimetrics纳入剂量管理体系,实现更精准的辐射防护和风险评估。

     

    Abstract: Objective: To investigate the impact of CARE kV technology on radiation dose in coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Methods: This retrospective study analyzed data from 1,529 patients who underwent CCTA at The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University between December 2023 and December 2024. All scans utilized CARE kV technology, with patients stratified by automatically selected kV values. Radiation dose metrics recorded included the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), dose-length product (DLP), size-specific dose estimate (SSDE), effective dose derived from DLP (ED_DLP), and Monte Carlo simulation-based effective dose (ED_Radimetrics). Dose ratio differences were characterized by SSDE/CTDIvol and ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP. Group comparisons were conducted using Kruskal–Wallis H tests with Bonferroni correction, while associations between kV and dose metrics/ratios were assessed with Spearman correlation analysis. Results: Patients were categorized into four kV groups: 70kV (n=815), 80kV (n=541), 90kV (n=67), and 100kV (n=106). Significant intergroup differences (all P < 0.05) were observed in all dose metrics (CTDIvol, DLP, SSDE, ED_DLP, ED_Radimetrics) and dose ratios (SSDE/CTDIvol, ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP). Spearman analysis revealed moderate positive correlations between kV and CTDIvol (ρ=0.52, P < 0.05), DLP (ρ=0.49, P < 0.05), SSDE (ρ=0.54, P < 0.05), ED_DLP (ρ=0.49, P < 0.05), and ED_Radimetrics (ρ=0.46, P < 0.05). A weak negative correlation was found between kV and SSDE/CTDIvol (ρ=−0.30, P < 0.05), while a negligible positive correlation was observed between kV and ED_Radimetrics/ED_DLP (ρ=0.07, P < 0.05). Conclusion: CARE kV technology effectively reduces radiation dose in CCTA. All dosimetric metrics exhibit moderate positive correlations with kV, underscoring kV selection as a critical determinant of dose control. Conventional metrics CTDIvol and ED_DLP systematically underestimate actual radiation dose levels, with the extent of underestimation showing minimal dependence on the CARE kV-selected kV values. We recommend integrating SSDE and ED_Radimetrics into standardized dose management protocols to enhance patient-specific radiation protection and risk stratification.

     

/

返回文章
返回