A Comparative Study of Radiation Dose in CT and MRI Imaging Techniques

Ahmed Falih Al-ysari; Yasser Yassin Khudair; Mohammed Fouad Majeed

Ahmed Falih Al-ysari Remote Sensing Unit, College of Science, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
Yasser Yassin Khudair Remote Sensing Unit, College of Science, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
Mohammed Fouad Majeed Remote Sensing Unit, College of Science, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

Keywords: MRI, CT, Radiation Dose, Imaging Technique

Abstract

This study presents a comparative analysis of radiation dosage levels obtained through the utilisation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) techniques. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans do not utilise ionising radiation as they instead rely on magnetic fields and radio waves, in contrast to computed tomography (CT) scans that employ ionising radiation. The apprehensions over the potential hazards associated with radiation exposure during CT scans have raised challenges pertaining to patient care and professional well-being. The objective of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis and assessment of radiation dose levels associated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations. Additionally, it seeks to investigate potential health hazards associated with radiation exposure from CT scans, analyse the factors that influence radiation dose in CT and MRI procedures, and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of MRI radiation dose.The objective of this inquiry is to comprehend the disparities in radiation exposure between CT and MRI. The study's findings will aid clinicians and patients in selecting imaging techniques by considering their benefits and potential risks in a more informed and efficient manner.

References

.Yaseen, H. F. (2022). Study the difference between the measurement of the radiation dose of MRI and CT scan. EUREKA: Health Sciences, (1), 63-68.‏

Tariq, M., Siddiqi, A. A., Narejo, G. B., & Andleeb, S. (2019). A cross sectional study of tumors using bio-medical imaging modalities. Current Medical Imaging, 15(1), 66-73.‏

Mazonakis, M., & Damilakis, J. (2016). Computed tomography: What and how does it measure?. European journal of radiology, 85(8), 1499-1504.‏

Junn, J. C., Soderlund, K. A., & Glastonbury, C. M. (2021, January). Imaging of head and neck cancer with CT, MRI, and US. In Seminars in nuclear medicine (Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 3-12). WB Saunders.‏

Kumar, P., & Pandey, A. K. (2019). THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RADIATION. Diagnostic Radiology: Advances in Imaging Technology, 407.‏

Huda, W., & Tipnis, S. V. (2016). Doses metrics and patient age in CT. Radiation protection dosimetry, 168(3), 374-380.‏

International Electrotechnical Commission. 2002. Medical electrical equipment. Part 2–44: Particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for computed tomography. IEC publication No. 60601–60602–60644. Ed. 2.1. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

Dixon RL. 2003 A new look at CT dose measurement: beyond CTDI. Med. Phys.;30:1272–1280.

Liu, X., Faes, L., Kale, A. U., Wagner, S. K., Fu, D. J., Bruynseels, A., ... & Denniston, A. K. (2019). A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The lancet digital health, 1(6), e271-e297.‏

International Commission on Radiological Protection 2007: Managing patient dose from multi detector computed tomography (MDCT), (ICRP Publication 102) Ann. ICRP.;37(1):1–79.

Al-OThman, A. (2022). Radiation Dose Optimization for Routine Radiological Studies Using Computed Tomography: A Comparison Based on National Dose Reference Levels and Effective Dose Calculation (Doctoral dissertation, Alfaisal University (Saudi Arabia)).‏

Ahmed, N. N. (2017). Estimation of organ doses and risk of cancer associated with CT examination.‏

Fisher, D. R., & Fahey, F. H. (2017). Appropriate use of effective dose in radiation protection and risk assessment. Health physics, 113(2), 102-109.‏

Bergen, R. V., & Ryner, L. (2019). Assessing image artifacts from radiotherapy electromagnetic transponders with metal-artifact reduction imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 59, 137–142. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2019.02.005.

Moolman, N., Mulla, F., & Mdletshe, S. (2020). Radiographer knowledge and practice of paediatric radiation dose protocols in digital radiography in Gauteng. Radiography, 26(2), 117–121. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.09.006.

Hawarihewa, P. M., Satharasinghe, D., Amalaraj, T., & Jeyasugiththan, J. (2021). An assessment of Sri Lankan radiographer’s knowledge and awareness of radiation protection and imaging parameters related to patient dose and image quality in computed tomography (CT). Radiography. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2021.10.010.

Smith-Bindman, R., Lَpez-Solano, N., Miglioretti, D., Flynn, M., & Seibert, J. A. (2020). Why Do Radiation Doses in CT Differ across Hospitals and Countries? Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). doi: http://doi.org/10.25302/07.2020. cd.13047043.

Bowen, S. R., Yuh, W. T. C., Hippe, D. S., et al. (2018). Tumor radiomic heterogeneity: Multiparametric functional imaging to characterize variability and predict response following cervical cancer radiation therapy. J Magn Reson Imaging, 47, 1388–1396.

Enkhbaatar, N. E., Inoue, S., Yamamuro, H., et al. (2018). MR Imaging with Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Histogram Analysis: Evaluation of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy. Radiology, 288, 129–137.

Dalah, E., Erickson, B., Oshima, K., et al. (2018). Correlation of ADC With Pathological Treatment Response for Radiation Therapy of Pancreatic Cancer. Transl Oncol, 11, 391–398.

Kasban, H., El-Bendary, M. A. M., & Salama, D. H. (2015). A comparative study of medical imaging techniques. International Journal of Information Science and Intelligent System, 4(2), 37-58.‏