Dose development in sinonasal imaging over the last decade – a retrospective patient study

Head & Face Medicine

Table 4 Overview on CTDI_Vol and DLP values for each scanning protocol for trauma diagnostic

	CTDI_Vol		DLP
Scanning protocol	Mean (mGy)	Reduction in % compared to DS 64 / FBP	Mean ± Std. Dev. (mGy x cm)			Reduction in % compared to DS 64 / FBP
DS 64 / FBP	14.9	-	232	±	43	-
DS 64 / 1st Gen.	13.7	9	218	±	78	6
DS 64 / 2nd Gen.	10.6	29	168	±	36	27
SS 128 / FBP	10.9	27	154	±	27	34
SS 128 / 2nd Gen.	8.7	42	134	±	29	42
DS 192 / 3rd Gen. + ATCM	11.9	20	199	±	47	14
DS 192 / 3rd Gen. - ATCM	8.8	41	140	±	25	40
DS 192 / 3rd Gen. 2022	5.0	66	76	±	11	67

Mean value (± standard deviation) of CTDI_Vol and DLP values of protocols used for trauma assessment in the past 12 years. Additionally, the dose reduction in percent per scan protocol compared the DS 64 / FBP protocol is shown for the CTDI_Vol and DLP values. ATCM = automatic tube current modulation, CBCT = cone beam CT, CT = computed tomography, CTDI_Vol = computed tomography dose index, DLP = dose length product, FBP = filtered back projection, Gen. = generation.

ISSN: 1746-160X