Rossi Pier Luca, Bianchini David, Lombi Alessandro, Sapignoli Sonia, Zanzi Manami, Corazza Ivan
O.U. Medical Physics, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 6/2, 40124 Bologna, Italy.
Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine Department, University of Bologna, Via Massarenti 9, 40138 Bologna, Italy.
Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2020 Jul-Sep;30(3):372-375. doi: 10.4103/ijri.IJRI_247_20. Epub 2020 Oct 15.
Thanks to its lack of allergic reactions and renal toxicity, CO represents an alternative to iodine as a contrast medium for peripheral subtraction angiography. Since CO has a lower and negative contrast than iodine, postprocessing DSA and stacking are mandatory. So, it seems that higher doses than traditional iodine angiography are required. We addressed the dosimetric aspects of CO angiography for two different commercial DSA-apparatus.
Two different radiological suites were analyzed by recreating the same setup on all the apparatuses: we used a PMMA slabs phantom with a MPD Barracuda dosimeter on its side to collect all radiological parameters.
Results show that the irradiation parameters were left completely unchanged between the traditional and CO angiographic programs.
This leads to thinking that these CO protocols do not operate on the X-ray emission, but only differ on image manipulation. The possibility of improvements by changing radiological parameters are still not explored and really promising.
由于一氧化碳（CO）没有过敏反应和肾毒性，它可作为碘的替代品，用于外周减影血管造影的造影剂。由于CO的对比度低于碘且为负性，因此必须进行数字减影血管造影（DSA）后处理和叠加。所以，似乎需要比传统碘血管造影更高的剂量。我们探讨了两种不同商用DSA设备进行CO血管造影的剂量学方面问题。
通过在所有设备上重现相同设置，对两个不同的放射科检查室进行分析：我们使用了一个聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯（PMMA）平板体模，其侧面带有一个MPD梭鱼剂量计，以收集所有放射学参数。
结果表明，传统血管造影程序和CO血管造影程序之间的照射参数完全没有变化。
这使我们认为这些CO方案并非作用于X射线发射，而只是在图像处理上有所不同。通过改变放射学参数进行改进的可能性仍未得到探索，但前景十分广阔。
