Literature DB >> 20095278

Reducing radiation dose to selected organs by selecting the tube start angle in MDCT helical scans: a Monte Carlo based study.

Di Zhang1, Maria Zankl, John J DeMarco, Chris H Cagnon, Erin Angel, Adam C Turner, Michael F McNitt-Gray.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Previous work has demonstrated that there are significant dose variations with a sinusoidal pattern on the peripheral of a CTDI 32 cm phantom or on the surface of an anthropomorphic phantom when helical CT scanning is performed, resulting in the creation of "hot" spots or "cold" spots. The purpose of this work was to perform preliminary investigations into the feasibility of exploiting these variations to reduce dose to selected radiosensitive organs solely by varying the tube start angle in CT scans.
METHODS: Radiation dose to several radiosensitive organs (including breasts, thyroid, uterus, gonads, and eye lenses) resulting from MDCT scans were estimated using Monte Carlo simulation methods on voxelized patient models, including GSF's Baby, Child, and Irene. Dose to fetus was also estimated using four pregnant female models based on CT images of the pregnant patients. Whole-body scans were simulated using 120 kVp, 300 mAs, both 28.8 and 40 mm nominal collimations, and pitch values of 1.5, 1.0, and 0.75 under a wide range of start angles (0 degree-340 degrees in 20 degrees increments). The relationship between tube start angle and organ dose was examined for each organ, and the potential dose reduction was calculated.
RESULTS: Some organs exhibit a strong dose variation, depending on the tube start angle. For small peripheral organs (e.g., the eye lenses of the Baby phantom at pitch 1.5 with 40 mm collimation), the minimum dose can be 41% lower than the maximum dose, depending on the tube start angle. In general, larger dose reductions occur for smaller peripheral organs in smaller patients when wider collimation is used. Pitch 1.5 and pitch 0.75 have different mechanisms of dose reduction. For pitch 1.5 scans, the dose is usually lowest when the tube start angle is such that the x-ray tube is posterior to the patient when it passes the longitudinal location of the organ. For pitch 0.75 scans, the dose is lowest when the tube start angle is such that the x-ray tube is anterior to the patient when it passes the longitudinal location of the organ.
CONCLUSIONS: Helical MDCT scanning at pitch 1.5 and pitch 0.75 results in "cold spots" and "hot spots" that are created both at surface and in-depth locations within patients. For organs that have a relatively small longitudinal extent, dose can vary considerably with different start angles. While current MDCT systems do not provide the user with the ability to control the tube start angle, these results indicate that in these specific situations (pitch 1.5 or pitch 0.75, small organs and especially small patients), there could be significant dose savings to organs if that functionality would be provided.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20095278      PMCID: PMC2797045          DOI: 10.1118/1.3259773

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  20 in total

1.  Organ dose conversion coefficients for external photon irradiation of male and female voxel models.

Authors:  M Zanki; U Fill; N Petoussi-Henss; D Regulla
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2002-07-21       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Carl D Elliston
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-07-23       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  A Monte Carlo based method to estimate radiation dose from multidetector CT (MDCT): cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms.

Authors:  J J DeMarco; C H Cagnon; D D Cody; D M Stevens; C H McCollough; J O'Daniel; M F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2005-08-11       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 4.  CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options.

Authors:  Cynthia H McCollough; Michael R Bruesewitz; James M Kofler
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

5.  A Monte Carlo-based method to estimate radiation dose from spiral CT: from phantom testing to patient-specific models.

Authors:  G Jarry; J J DeMarco; U Beifuss; C H Cagnon; M F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2003-08-21       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  A method to generate equivalent energy spectra and filtration models based on measurement for multidetector CT Monte Carlo dosimetry simulations.

Authors:  Adam C Turner; Di Zhang; Hyun J Kim; John J DeMarco; Chris H Cagnon; Erin Angel; Dianna D Cody; Donna M Stevens; Andrew N Primak; Cynthia H McCollough; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  A CT-based Monte Carlo simulation tool for dosimetry planning and analysis.

Authors:  J J DeMarco; T D Solberg; J B Smathers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 8.  The GSF family of voxel phantoms.

Authors:  Nina Petoussi-Henss; Maria Zanki; Ute Fill; Dieter Regulla
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2002-01-07       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Radiation dose to the fetus for pregnant patients undergoing multidetector CT imaging: Monte Carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size.

Authors:  Erin Angel; Clinton V Wellnitz; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Nazanin Yaghmai; John J DeMarco; Christopher H Cagnon; James W Sayre; Dianna D Cody; Donna M Stevens; Andrew N Primak; Cynthia H McCollough; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Monte Carlo simulations to assess the effects of tube current modulation on breast dose for multidetector CT.

Authors:  Erin Angel; Nazanin Yaghmai; Cecilia Matilda Jude; John J Demarco; Christopher H Cagnon; Jonathan G Goldin; Andrew N Primak; Donna M Stevens; Dianna D Cody; Cynthia H McCollough; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-01-06       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  4 in total

1.  A comparison of methods to estimate organ doses in CT when utilizing approximations to the tube current modulation function.

Authors:  Maryam Khatonabadi; Di Zhang; Kelsey Mathieu; Hyun J Kim; Peiyun Lu; Dianna Cody; John J Demarco; Chris H Cagnon; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  A real-time Monte Carlo tool for individualized dose estimations in clinical CT.

Authors:  Shobhit Sharma; Anuj Kapadia; Wanyi Fu; Ehsan Abadi; W Paul Segars; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT: part I. development and validation of a Monte Carlo program.

Authors:  Xiang Li; Ehsan Samei; W Paul Segars; Gregory M Sturgeon; James G Colsher; Greta Toncheva; Terry T Yoshizumi; Donald P Frush
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT: part II. Application to patients.

Authors:  Xiang Li; Ehsan Samei; W Paul Segars; Gregory M Sturgeon; James G Colsher; Greta Toncheva; Terry T Yoshizumi; Donald P Frush
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.071

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.