Please wait a minute...
文章检索
预防医学  2025, Vol. 37 Issue (12): 1257-1260,1265    DOI: 10.19485/j.cnki.issn2096-5087.2025.12.014
  疾病控制 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
基于宁波市影像云平台的CT检查大数据分析
章群1, 张丹丹1, 王永1, 张良1, 邹沅杰1, 陆蓓蓓1, 汤升2
1.宁波市疾病预防控制中心,浙江 宁波 315000;
2.宁波市北仑区人民医院,浙江 宁波 315800
CT examination big data based on the Ningbo City Medical Imaging Cloud Platform
ZHANG Qun1, ZHANG Dandan1, WANG Yong1, ZHANG Liang1, ZOU Yuanjie1, LU Beibei1, TANG Sheng2
1. Ningbo Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Ningbo, Zhejiang 315000, China;
2. Beilun People's Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang 315800, China
全文: PDF(832 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 目的 评价宁波市影像云平台计算机断层扫描(CT)检查的辐射剂量、操作规范性和成像质量,为优化CT检查提供参考。方法 通过宁波市影像云平台随机抽取6台CT设备,收集2023年1月—2024年12月36~60岁男性头部、颈部、胸部和腹部CT检查医学数字成像与通信(DICOM)影像资料。采用容积CT剂量指数(CTDIvol)和剂量长度乘积(DLP)评价辐射剂量水平,计算CTDIvol和扫描长度的变异系数(CV)评价扫描稳定性,采用扫描长度冗余率和协议匹配度评价操作规范性,采用信噪比(SNR)和对比度噪声比(CNR)评价成像质量。结果 采集DICOM影像文件28 897份,头颅轴扫、颈部平扫、胸部平扫和腹部平扫分别为6 730、2 778、15 496和3 893份。头部、颈部和胸部CTDIvol和DLP辐射剂量典型值均低于诊断参考水平,腹部CTDIvol和DLP典型值最大分别为22.49 mGy和941.45 mGy·cm,高于诊断参考水平。CTDIvol和扫描长度的CV值分别为14.59%~37.88%和8.27%~44.96%,头部CT的扫描稳定性较差,分别为21.74%~37.88%和12.66%~44.96%。扫描长度冗余率为6.02%~74.40%,协议匹配度为79.80%~100.00%,颈部CT的操作规范性较差,分别为45.70%~74.40%和79.80%~95.36%。胸部肺动脉SNR均值和CNR均值较高,分别为15.81~17.65和6.33~7.41。结论 部分CT设备腹部CT检查辐射剂量超出诊断参考水平,头部CT检查扫描稳定性和颈部CT检查操作规范性是质量控制的薄弱点。建议开展针对性的质量控制培训,提高CT检查的整体质量水平。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
章群
张丹丹
王永
张良
邹沅杰
陆蓓蓓
汤升
关键词 计算机断层扫描辐射剂量成像质量质量控制云平台    
AbstractObjective To evaluate the radiation dose, operational standardization, and image quality of computed tomography (CT) Ningbo City Medical Imaging Cloud Platform, so as to provide references for optimizing the quality of CT examinations. Methods Six CT devices were randomly selected from the Ningbo City Medical Imaging Cloud Platform. Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine (DICOM) image data from CT examinations of the head, neck, chest, and abdomen in males aged 36 to 60 years were collected from January 2023 to December 2024. The radiation dose levels were evaluated using the volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and dose length product (DLP). The coefficient of variation (CV) of CTDIvol and scan length were calculated to assess scan stability. Operational standardization was evaluated using the redundancy rate of scan length and protocol matching degree. Imaging quality was assessed using the signal to noise ratio (SNR) and contrast to noise ratio (CNR). Results A total of 28 897 DICOM images were collected, including 6 730 axial scans of the skull, 2 778 plain scans of the neck, 15 496 plain scans of the chest, and 3 893 plain scans of the abdomen. The typical values of CTDIvol and DLP radiation doses for the head, neck, and chest were all lower than the diagnostic reference levels. The maximum typical values of CTDIvol and DLP for the abdomen were 22.49 mGy and 941.45 mGy·cm, respectively, which were higher than the diagnostic reference levels. The CV values of CTDIvol and scan length ranged from 14.59% to 37.88% and from 8.27% to 44.96%, respectively. The scan stability of head CT was relatively poor, with CV values ranging from 21.74% to 37.88% and from 12.66% to 44.96%, respectively. The redundancy rate of scan length ranged from 6.02% to 74.40%, and the protocol matching degree ranged from 79.80% to 100.00%. The operational standardization of neck CT was relatively poor, with redundancy rates ranging from 45.70% to 74.40% and protocol matching degrees ranging from 79.80% to 95.36%. The mean SNR and mean CNR of the pulmonary arteries in the chest were relatively high, ranging from 15.81 to 17.65 and from 6.33 to 7.41, respectively. Conclusions The radiation doses from abdominal CT examinations on some CT devices exceed the diagnostic reference levels. The scan stability of head CT examinations and the operational standardization of neck CT examinations represent weak points in quality control. It is recommended to carry out targeted quality control training to enhance the overall quality level of CT examinations.
Key wordscomputed tomography    radiation dose    image quality    quality control    cloud platform
收稿日期: 2025-06-23      修回日期: 2025-11-10      出版日期: 2025-12-10
中图分类号:  R814.4  
基金资助:浙江省公益技术应用研究计划项目(LGH22H220002); 宁波市医学重点学科项目(2022-B18); 浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(2024KY350,2024XY144)
作者简介: 章群,硕士,副主任医师,主要从事放射卫生监测工作
通信作者: 张丹丹,E-mail:zhangdd@nbcdc.org.cn   
引用本文:   
章群, 张丹丹, 王永, 张良, 邹沅杰, 陆蓓蓓, 汤升. 基于宁波市影像云平台的CT检查大数据分析[J]. 预防医学, 2025, 37(12): 1257-1260,1265.
ZHANG Qun, ZHANG Dandan, WANG Yong, ZHANG Liang, ZOU Yuanjie, LU Beibei, TANG Sheng. CT examination big data based on the Ningbo City Medical Imaging Cloud Platform. Preventive Medicine, 2025, 37(12): 1257-1260,1265.
链接本文:  
http://www.zjyfyxzz.com/CN/10.19485/j.cnki.issn2096-5087.2025.12.014      或      http://www.zjyfyxzz.com/CN/Y2025/V37/I12/1257
[1] DELIS H,CHRISTAKI K,HEALY B,et al.Moving beyond quality control in diagnostic radiology and the role of the clinically qualified medical physicist[J].Phys Med,2017,41:104-108.
[2] WAHLER N,KAA BACHI B,KULYNYCH B,et al.Evaluating synthetic data augmentation to correct for data imbalance in realistic clinical prediction settings[J/OL].Stud Health Technol Inform,2024[2025-11-10] .https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI240563.
[3] 国家市场监督管理总局,国家标准化管理委员会.中国成年人人体尺寸:GB/T 10000—2023[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2023.
State Administration for Market Regulation,Standardization Administration of the People's Republic of China.Human dimensions of Chinese adults:GB/T 10000—2023[S].Beijing:Standards Press of China,2023.(in Chinese)
[4] VAÑÓ E,MILLER D L,MARTIN C J,et al.ICRP publication 135:diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging[J].Ann ICRP,2017,46(1):1-144.
[5] 中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会.放射诊断放射防护要求:GBZ 130—2020[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2020.
National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. Requirements for radiological protection in diagnostic radiology:GBZ 130—2020[S].Beijing:Standards Press of China,2020.(in Chinese)
[6] 魏巍,杨旭,童小雨,等.深度学习重建算法联合低剂量增强CT对肝脏低对比度病灶显示的影响[J].中国医学计算机成像杂志,2024,30(3):333-337.
WEI W,YANG X,TONG X Y,et al.Effect of deep learning reconstruction algorithm combined with low-dose contrast-enhanced CT on liver low-contrast lesion[J].Chin Comput Med Imag,2024,30(3):333-337.(in Chinese)
[7] MULLINS M E,LEV M H,BOVE P,et al.Comparison of image quality between conventional and low-dose nonenhanced head CT[J].AJNR Am J Neuroradiol,2004,25(4):533-538.
[8] 丁晨寒,宋凤祥,杨泽铖.低管电压联合顺适性低剂量容积双空间迭代重建技术在头颈部CT血管成像中的应用[J].中国医学影像学杂志,2024,32(4):379-385.
DING C H,SONG F X,YANG Z C.Low tube voltage combined with adaptive iterative dose reduction using three-dimensional processing in head and neck CT angiography[J].Chin J Med Imag,2024,32(4):379-385.(in Chinese)
[9] MCCULLOGH C,CODY D,EDYVEAN S,et al.The measurement,reporting,and management of radiation dose in CT[M].Maryland:American Association of Physicists in Medicine,2008.
[10] PARK I,SONG J,KIM K.SU-F-I-40:impact of scan length on patient dose in abdomen/pelvis CT diagnosis[J].Med Phys,2016,43(6):3395-3396.
[11] LIAO E A,QUINT L E,GOODSITT M M,et al.Extra Z-axis coverage at CT imaging resulting in excess radiation dose:frequency,degree,and contributory factors[J].J Comput Assist Tomogr,2011,35(1):50-56.
[12] LONG Z Y,BRUESEWITZ M R,DELONE D R,et al.Evaluation of projection- and dual-energy-based methods for metal artifact reduction in CT using a phantom study[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(4):252-260.
[13] ALZUFRI H S,NURMIATI D.The influence of CT parameters for optimizing radiation dose and CT scan image quality in head and abdominal examinations at Cibinong Sentra Medika Hospital[C].Prosiding Seminar Si-INTAN,2023,3(1):17-22.
[14] DUERDEN L,O'BRIEN H,DOSHI S,et al.Impact of an ultra-low dose unenhanced planning scan on CT coronary angiography scan length and effective radiation dose[J/OL].BJR Open,2022,4(1)[2025-11-10] .https://doi.org/10.1259/bjro.20210056.
[15] O'NEILL E K,COGLEY J R,MILLER F H.The ins and outs of liver imaging[J].Clin Liver Dis,2015,19(1):99-121.
[16] 吴一田,耿建华,杜召猛,等.PET/CT中CT自动管电流调制模式下受检者有效剂量的研究[J].中国辐射卫生,2018,27(1):39-43.
WU Y T,GENG J H,DU Z M,et al.Study on the effective dose of CT in PET/CT on automatic tube current modulation[J].Chin J Radiol Health,2018,27(1):39-43.(in Chinese)
[17] WANG R,XU X J,HUANG G,et al.Comparison of image quality,diagnostic accuracy and radiation dose between flash model and retrospective ECG-triggered protocols in dual source computed tomography(DSCT)in congenital heart diseases[J].Pol J Radiol,2017,82:114-119.
[18] KIM D,JEON P H,LEE C L,et al.Effect of tube voltage and radiation dose on image quality in pediatric abdominal CT using deep learning reconstruction:a phantom study[J/OL].Symmetry,2023,15(2)[2025-11-10] .https://doi.org/10.3390/sym15020501.
[1] 孔林羽, 蔡斌. DRGs绩效评价在医疗质量精细化管理中的应用[J]. 预防医学, 2024, 36(7): 636-639,643.
[2] 徐艳华, 毛华庆, 徐益红, 杨茹莱. 浙江省新生儿疾病筛查工作质量监测与评价[J]. 预防医学, 2022, 34(8): 848-851.
[3] 张林, 卢安心, 刘军霞, 林崟, 李菁, 颜崇淮. 铅暴露对大鼠孕期骨铅动员及骨微结构的影响[J]. 预防医学, 2022, 34(10): 996-1001.
[4] 张丹丹, 章群, 王爱红, 张良, 王雪英, 胡群雄. 北仑区医疗机构CT检查的频度及辐射剂量分析[J]. 预防医学, 2021, 33(6): 618-620.
[5] 曾刘桃, 陈钧强, 蒋兆强, 徐秀芳. 尘肺病影像学诊断的研究进展[J]. 预防医学, 2021, 33(12): 1236-1239.
[6] 任鸿, 王鹏, 曹艺耀, 张美辨, 宣志强, 邹华, 俞顺飞, 周振. 浙江省职业卫生检测能力实验室间比对结果分析[J]. 预防医学, 2020, 32(6): 641-643.
[7] 唐锋,奚颖霞,黄文青. 国家免费孕前优生健康检查项目室间质量评价结果[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(7): 754-756.
[8] 边阳甫, 彭艳, 钟皓成. 杭州市6例职业性放射性白内障病例分析[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(5): 526-527,530.
[9] 徐倩倩, 丁十戈, 朱莹莹, 贺天锋, 梅秋红, 冯宏伟, 张涛. 宁波健康教育云平台构建及应用[J]. 预防医学, 2018, 30(12): 1291-1293.
[10] 赵三虎, 吴寿明, 俞顺飞, 赵尧贤, 郦依华, 李新星, 罗进, 宣志强. 浙江省医用放射诊疗设备辐射防护现况调查[J]. 预防医学, 2016, 28(7): 721-722,725.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed