[Intl_DxMedPhys] Recurrent CT imaging and strategies for patient radiation protection

[Devin Baillie]

If they're not accounting for the specific patient population, I don't think it is particularly useful.

Cancer patients being scanned to monitor treatment response or for adaptive radiotherapy are going to get much higher CED than trauma patients getting a CT on admission and one follow-up scan 6-24 hours later to monitor for changes.  Comparing the RERL for a large cancer centre with in-house imaging to the DI department at a smaller ER isn't a meaningful comparison.

I could see it being a potentially useful metric if they're calculating it based on the clinical indication or for equivalent patient populations, but even then I'm not sure how it would offer anything useful over DRLs and number of scans separately, both of which are more directly actionable.  You can reduce the dose per scan or the number of scans, but you can't reduce the CED without doing at least one of the two.

Devin

________________________________
From: Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list-bounces+devin.baillie=cancercarealberta.ca at lists.osu.edu> on behalf of Bill Erwin via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
Sent: February 24, 2026 1:39 PM
To: intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: [Intl_DxMedPhys] Recurrent CT imaging and strategies for patient radiation protection

Caution - This email came from an external address and may contain unsafe content. Ensure you trust this sender before opening attachments or clicking any links in this message
________________________________
An article was just published regarding cumulative CT dose and a so-called recurrent exposure reference level (RERL).   (I came across it via AuntMinnie. )  I am thinking there might be some opinions about this amongst the listers.   Discussion
An article was just published regarding cumulative CT dose and a so-called recurrent exposure reference level (RERL).  (I came across it via AuntMinnie.)  I am thinking there might be some opinions about this amongst the listers.  Discussion commences ...

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6498/ae4521__;!!KGKeukY!zwEYROr4Z2hVQxTBkwcaLk3StO7UAn31bGI0b8fNRxriyeFVLnIhtxjOdbWCLX2nRzNcBHwNVJHFIDYZGnYna8drbI20j4uv-CgTnzGvVZKl0jsXiXNFAWF1$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6498/ae4521__;!!KGKeukY!0xsXpnIvIam9SVWOPEGMQWIzdeNEEt19uAjta45VhWA_Y-kAfvKdXOrwOr7_zNNYa6f4ZiK2Xnwy8g8HgOzR8AmGzDtx-cdNNcKVDFCY$>

Regards,
Bill

________________________________
This message and any attached documents are only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential and may contain privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, retransmission, or other disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and then delete the original message. Thank you.
________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20260226/0ba78236/attachment.html>