Literature DB >> 20145291

Theoretical variance analysis of single- and dual-energy computed tomography methods for calculating proton stopping power ratios of biological tissues.

M Yang1, G Virshup, J Clayton, X R Zhu, R Mohan, L Dong.   

Abstract

We discovered an empirical relationship between the logarithm of mean excitation energy (ln Im) and the effective atomic number (EAN) of human tissues, which allows for computing patient-specific proton stopping power ratios (SPRs) using dual-energy CT (DECT) imaging. The accuracy of the DECT method was evaluated for 'standard' human tissues as well as their variance. The DECT method was compared to the existing standard clinical practice-a procedure introduced by Schneider et al at the Paul Scherrer Institute (the stoichiometric calibration method). In this simulation study, SPRs were derived from calculated CT numbers of known material compositions, rather than from measurement. For standard human tissues, both methods achieved good accuracy with the root-mean-square (RMS) error well below 1%. For human tissues with small perturbations from standard human tissue compositions, the DECT method was shown to be less sensitive than the stoichiometric calibration method. The RMS error remained below 1% for most cases using the DECT method, which implies that the DECT method might be more suitable for measuring patient-specific tissue compositions to improve the accuracy of treatment planning for charged particle therapy. In this study, the effects of CT imaging artifacts due to the beam hardening effect, scatter, noise, patient movement, etc were not analyzed. The true potential of the DECT method achieved in theoretical conditions may not be fully achievable in clinical settings. Further research and development may be needed to take advantage of the DECT method to characterize individual human tissues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20145291     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/55/5/006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  57 in total

1.  A linear, separable two-parameter model for dual energy CT imaging of proton stopping power computation.

Authors:  Dong Han; Jeffrey V Siebers; Jeffrey F Williamson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Material elemental decomposition in dual and multi-energy CT via a sparsity-dictionary approach for proton stopping power ratio calculation.

Authors:  Chenyang Shen; Bin Li; Liyuan Chen; Ming Yang; Yifei Lou; Xun Jia
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Early Axial Growth Outcomes of Pediatric Patients Receiving Proton Craniospinal Irradiation.

Authors:  Brian De; Oren Cahlon; Kevin Sine; Dennis Mah; Eugen B Hug; Suzanne L Wolden
Journal:  J Pediatr Hematol Oncol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.289

4.  Does kV-MV dual-energy computed tomography have an advantage in determining proton stopping power ratios in patients?

Authors:  M Yang; G Virshup; J Clayton; X R Zhu; R Mohan; L Dong
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 5.  Image guidance in proton therapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Miao Zhang; Wei Zou; Boon-Keng Kevin Teo
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2018-04

6.  Systematic analysis of the impact of imaging noise on dual-energy CT-based proton stopping power ratio estimation.

Authors:  Hugh H C Lee; Bin Li; Xinhui Duan; Linghong Zhou; Xun Jia; Ming Yang
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Theoretical and experimental analysis of photon counting detector CT for proton stopping power prediction.

Authors:  Vicki T Taasti; David C Hansen; Gregory J Michalak; Amanda J Deisher; Jon J Kruse; Ludvig P Muren; Jørgen B B Petersen; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  The effect of beam purity and scanner complexity on proton CT accuracy.

Authors:  P Piersimoni; J Ramos-Méndez; T Geoghegan; V A Bashkirov; R W Schulte; B A Faddegon
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Tissue decomposition from dual energy CT data for MC based dose calculation in particle therapy.

Authors:  Nora Hünemohr; Harald Paganetti; Steffen Greilich; Oliver Jäkel; Joao Seco
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Site-specific range uncertainties caused by dose calculation algorithms for proton therapy.

Authors:  J Schuemann; S Dowdell; C Grassberger; C H Min; H Paganetti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.609

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.