258 S. Semghouli et al.: Radioprotection 2025, 60( 3), 256 – 261
Table 1. Acquisition parameters for the four radiographic procedures studied. Radiographic examination kV mAs
|
Min |
Max |
Mean |
SD |
Min |
Max |
Mean |
SD |
Thorax( PA) |
70 |
109 |
87 |
7.84 |
2.5 |
5 |
3.35 |
0.49 |
lumbar spine( AP) |
68 |
76 |
71.06 |
2.03 |
31 |
41 |
33.96 |
4.03 |
Abdomen( AP) |
60 |
80 |
69.23 |
4.36 |
20 |
51 |
34.9 |
6.71 |
Pelvis( AP) |
60 |
87 |
71.3 |
4.52 |
20 |
40 |
34 |
5.29 |
Table 2. Entrance dose and dose-area product for the four radiographic procedures studied. Radiographic examination ESD( mGy) DAP( cGy cm 2)
|
Min |
Max |
Mean |
SD |
Min |
Max |
Mean |
SD |
Thorax( PA) |
0.09 |
0.40 |
0.17 |
0.06 |
09.08 |
39.57 |
16.53 |
6.35 |
Lumbar spine( AP) |
1.63 |
3.37 |
2.55 |
0.38 |
141.58 |
332.21 |
213.11 |
40.30 |
Abdomen( AP) |
1.28 |
4.30 |
2.16 |
0.65 |
101.66 |
447.64 |
230.55 |
75.66 |
Pelvis( AP) |
1.08 |
4.54 |
2.63 |
0.65 |
57.51 |
427.53 |
265.19 |
74.96 |
Table 3. Comparison of the 3 rd quartiles of DAP from this study with previous studies. Radiographic examinations This study France 2018 Germany 2019 Austria 2019 Saudi Arabia 2021
DAP( cGy cm 2)
Thorax( PA) |
16.58 |
20 |
15 |
13.9 |
8.48 |
lumbar spine( AP) |
245 |
270 |
200 |
195.2 |
253.78 |
Abdomen( AP) |
291.83 |
340 |
230 |
209.9 |
197.85 |
Pelvis( AP) |
300.45 |
380 |
250 |
212.1 |
172.79 |
Table 4. DRLs calculated for the four radiographic examinations.
|
Thorax( PA) |
Lumbar spine( A / P) |
Abdomen( A / P) |
Pelvis( A / P) |
ESD( mGy) |
0.17 |
2.77 |
2.64 |
2.87 |
DAP( cGy cm 2) |
16.58 |
245 |
291.83 |
300.45 |
According to Table 2, the mean ESDs for the thorax( PA), lumbar spine( AP), abdomen( AP), and pelvis( AP) were 0.17, 2.55, 2.16, and 2.63 mGy, respectively. The mean DAP values for the thorax( PA), lumbar spine( AP), abdomen( AP), and pelvis( AP) were 16.53, 213.11, 230.55, and 265.19 cGy. cm 2, respectively.
The diagnostic reference levels, which represent 75 percentile entrance doses and dose-area product, were estimated on the basis of the results of the four radiographic examinations studied. Table 3 shows the DRLs for the four examinations.
According to Table 4, the DRLs in terms of ESD for the thorax( PA), lumbar spine( AP), abdomen( AP), and pelvis( AP) were 0.17, 2.77, 2.64, 2.87 mGy, respectively. In terms of DAP, they were 16.58, 245, 291.83, and 300.45 cGy cm 2, respectively.
According to Table 5, there is a significant relationship between DAP and tension, charge, and ESD for all examinations. In addition, there was a significant relationship between DAP and BMI for abdomen X-ray, and no significant relationship for the three other X-ray examinations. Table 5 also shows no significant relationship between DAP and patient age.
4 Discussion
The results show that most patients studied were female( 52 %). The majority of patients were 46 – 60 years of age( 33.33 %). The choice of acquisition parameters is based on several criteria, including BMI, region examined, and type of examination, which justify the variation observed in image acquisition parameters even for the same type of examination. The variation of acquisition parameters for the same examination at the same hospital is mainly due to a non-standardization of radiological procedures( El Fahssi et al., 2023). The results show