Reduced Kilovoltage in Computed Tomography–Guided Intervention in a Community Hospital: Effect on the Radiation Dose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether low-kilovoltage (80 or 100 kV) computed tomography (CT)-guided interventions performed in a community-based hospital are feasible and to compare radiation exposure incurred with conventional 120 kV potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Effective doses (ED) received by patients who underwent CT-guided intervention were analysed before and after a low-dose kilovoltage protocol was instituted in our department. We performed CT-guided procedures of 93 consecutive patients by using conventional 120-kV tube voltage (50 patients) and a low voltage of 80 or 100 kV for the remainder of this cohort. Automatic tube current modulation was enabled to obtain the best image quality. Procedure details were prospectively recorded and included examination site and type, slice width, tube voltage and current, dose length product, volume CT dose index, and size-specific dose estimate. Dose length product was converted to ED to account for radiosensitivity of specific organs. Statistical comparisons with test differences in the ED, volume CT dose index, size-specific dose estimate, and effective diameter (patient size) were made by using the Student t test. RESULTS: All but 6 of the procedures performed at 80 kV were successful, for a success rate of 86%. At lower voltages, the ED was significantly (P < .01) reduced, on average, by 57%, 73%, and 65% for the pelvic, chest, and abdomen procedures, respectively. CONCLUSION: A low-dose radiation technique by using 80 or 100 kV results in a high technical success rate for pelvic, chest, and abdomen CT-guided interventional procedures, although dramatically decreasing radiation exposure. There was no significant difference in effective diameter (patient size) between the conventional and the low-dose groups, which would suggest that dose reduction was indeed a result of kVp change and not patient size.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".