CT scan

[peteshonkwiler]

Had a scan done by an experienced operator. When I identified myself as a RP professional and asked about the doses, they were provided immediately. Quite a refreshing approach!
Doses were:
CTDlvol 13.91mGy
DLP 490.83 mGy

and, because I didn't know either😉, here's the definitions:
"Dose length product (DLP) measured in mGycm is a measure of CT tube radiation output/exposure. It is related to volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), but CTDIvol represents the dose through a slice of an appropriate phantom. DLP accounts for the length of radiation output along the z-axis (the long axis of the patient)."

https://radiopaedia.org/articles/dose-length-product?lang=us#:~:text=Dose%20length%20product%20(DLP)%20measured,long%20axis%20of%20the%20patient).

[Marlin]

Periodic CT scans will be a follow up for me for a long time. I had a softball sized tumor and about a foot of intestine removed last year. The operators gave me my dose as one Rem apparently being located in Oak Ridge with all the nuclear related workers there they were prepared for my question. Of course I looked it up later. "Trust but verify". 

[peteshonkwiler]

My dose was bigger than your dose....🤣🤣

[Marlin]

My dose was bigger than your dose....🤣🤣

[peteshonkwiler]

Marlina, I have an idle conversation question. Do you think the radiologist gave you a quick, from the hip, answer to your question? 
I ask because it is a round number in the value that is familiar to nuke workers in the valley, as opposed to a value which a radiologist is more likely to assign a dose.

[Marlin]

Marlina, I have an idle conversation question. Do you think the radiologist gave you a quick, from the hip, answer to your question? 
I ask because it is a round number in the value that is familiar to nuke workers in the valley, as opposed to a value which a radiologist is more likely to assign a dose.

   Not sure I am guessing that she got it from another patient, there are a lot of Rad people including lots of PHDs down here. I had asked another operator some time before in prep for surgery and he did not know. An X-Ray tech I asked long time ago did not know the dose and responded with kilovolts meaning what he applied to the X-Ray tube to get the best quality picture. I suspect a lot of operators do not know as it is predetermined and their main focus is delivering clear images for the doctors.

My 

[RDTroja]

   Not sure I am guessing that she got it from another patient, there are a lot of Rad people including lots of PHDs down here. I had asked another operator some time pefore in prep for surgery and he did not know. An X-Ray tech I asked long time ago did not know the dose and responded with kilovolts meaning what he applied to the X-Ray tube to get the best quality picture. I suspect a lot of operators do not know as it is predetermined and their main focus is delivering clear images for the doctors.

My 

Many years ago I was in a car accident and needed an x-ray in south Jersey. When I asked the dose the technician replied 'You don't get any exposure. I have to wear a film badge (sic) to measure what I get. When I pushed her on that, she gruffly replied 'You work at that nuclear plant, don't you? You guys are always asking questions like that!"

Never did get an answer.

[Marlin]

Many years ago I was in a car accident and needed an x-ray in south Jersey. When I asked the dose the technician replied 'You don't get any exposure. I have to wear a film badge (sic) to measure what I get. When I pushed her on that, she gruffly replied 'You work at that nuclear plant, don't you? You guys are always asking questions like that!"

Never did get an answer.

"Noone expects the Troja Inquisition"

[peteshonkwiler]

Yins guys answers are totally in line with my  experiences, except this last one. One time, I had the tech tell me that my dose was a result of the applied voltage, so I told him I could get that formula and to let me know the what he used. He got real flustered and said he didn't have that number handy.😳 Which is why I found this last conversation so nice.  Although, her first responses were the numbers, so I had to ask about the units. That popped her eyes wide and she was back into the operator shack scanning her computer. Came back with the my units and a remark that having to deal with units like that took her back to XRay Tech classes!

[RDTroja]

"Noone expects the Troja Inquisition"

I don't know whether to be honored that I was incorporated into a Mel Brooks moment or pissed that I will now have that song in my head for a while...

[Marlin]

Could not help myself   

[SloGlo]

🤣🤣🤣

[peteshonkwiler]

Had my grandson in for a hip CT scan today. I asked what the dose would be from the scan. She replied with mobo jumbo designed to  satisfy the populace of the government levels and how the hospital used 15% of that. When I identified myself as a Rad Pro professional, she threw out the applied wattage numbers. I asked once more about the dose and she blew me off with not having the time to get that information.
Fricken Jrs!

[peteshonkwiler]

Just had an abdominal CT done. The rad tech this time was not as conversant as my previous experience. When I ID'd myself as a nuclear professional, she pulled the old dumb tech act and said that i would have to write the radiologist yadda yadda yadda and that she would have no availability of the data. Upon completion of the scan she said that she DID find the data in the printout by the machine. My exposure was 1.76mGy! As i was in alot of pain, i didn't push it. But, I know from previous, that was the dose per exposure, not the total. However, the dose per "slice" was quite a bit less than my prior CT, so unless she shot 8 times the previous I probably only got ~1 year's occupational.

[Marlin]

Hype or real issue. I did additional searches on the subject and came up with nothing.

This medical test may cause cancer due to 'unfathomable' mistake — and it's performed 93M times a year in the US

"No one intentionally harms their patients; they just haven't been paying attention to radiation dose," said Smith-Bindman, who worked with CMS to develop research solutions aimed at better measuring and assessing the effects of CT scans.

"The measure defines a clear standard for every type of scan with respect to dose and quality, and CMS provides incentives to reach those goals," she added. "Clinicians can exceed those targets if they deem it necessary; the measure just provides them a way to gauge their performance."

https://nypost.com/2025/03/11/health/common-medical-test-may-cause-cancer-due-to-unfathomable-mistake/

From WebMD

Can CT Scans Lead to Cancer?

https://www.webmd.com/cancer/can-ct-scans-lead-to-cancer

[Marlin]

"But they say the estimates found in the study should serve as a wake-up call — putting CT scanning on par with other well-known risk factors for cancer, including alcohol and obesity."

Study projects how much cancer is caused by CT scans

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/study-projects-how-much-cancer-is-caused-by-ct-scans/ar-AA1CTEL3?ocid=TobArticle