Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 27, 2026

Acetylcholine Re-Challenge After Intracoronary Nitroglycerine Administration
Published on: April 4, 2022
The American college of radiology diagnostic fluoroscopy dose index registry pilot: Dosimetric performance and
Steve D Mann1, Donald L Miller2, Grant Fong3
1Department of Radiology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Background:
The ACR Diagnostic Fluoroscopy Dose Index Registry (DIR-Fluoro) is expanding to include diagnostic fluoroscopy. Variations in dose reference points and overhead radiography events may introduce unique challenges for benchmarking.
Purpose:
To survey the technological status and dosimetric performance of fluoroscopes participating in the DIR-Fluoro pilot project, focusing on longitudinal stability and variability of fluoroscopic dose reporting accuracy across multiple institutions and vendors.
Methods:
Sixty-six fluoroscopic systems from nine institutions (24 facilities) were surveyed for facility type, fluoroscope type, image receptor type, age, dose reporting capabilities, and other key features. Of these, 56 were evaluable. Semi-annual measurements assessed reference air kerma (Ka,r) and air kerma area product (PKA) accuracy. Linear mixed-effects models evaluated changes in dose accuracy over time, incorporating system-specific random effects; models were compared using likelihood ratio testing. Radiation Dose Structured Reports (RDSR) contents were investigated to understand the challenges in benchmarking diagnostic fluoroscopy dose indices.
Results:
Nearly 80% of units were tube-under-table fluoroscopes. Average age was 9.6 ± 5.2 years. Sixty-four percent of the units produced RDSRs. Median deviations for Ka,r and PKA were 1%-4%. Accuracy of PKA and Ka,r remained stable, with no significant time-dependent drift for RDSR-capable systems (p > 0.05). Incorporating detector type significantly improved performance for PKA measurements (p < 0.05 for all datasets); Ka,r models were generally best fit by simpler models (p > 0.05 for 3 of 4 datasets). Major discrepancies in RDSRs were observed, including differences in Ka,r reference point definitions and in event-level data. Overhead radiography exposures were not well distinguished from fluoroscope exposures. These issues resulted in inconsistencies in reported Ka,r values.
Conclusion:
Fluoroscopic dose indices were accurate and stable over time. Differences in RDSR availability result in data biased to newer systems with flat panel detectors. Discrepancies in RDSR content and inconsistent reference point definitions necessitate use of PKA as the primary benchmark metric.
Related Concept Videos
Pilot and Numeric Relaying
Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT
Dose Size and Dosing Frequency: Determination Methods
Determination of Multiple Dosing Parameters: Loading and Maintenance Doses
Rational Dosage Regimen: Maintenance Dose and Loading Dose
In most cases, drugs are administered repetitively or infused continuously to maintain a steady-state concentration in the body. At a steady...
Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ventilation Perfusion Scans are two radiological investigations that offer detailed diagnostic images of the body, particularly lung structures.
MRI
MRI uses magnetic fields and radiofrequency signals to distinguish between normal and abnormal tissues. This technology provides a more detailed diagnostic image than CT scans, enabling it to characterize pulmonary nodules, stage bronchogenic carcinoma, and evaluate inflammatory activity in...

