I A Tsalafoutas1, S I Metallidis. 1. Medical Physics Department, Agios Savvas Hospital, 171 Alexandras Avenue, 115 22, Athens, Greece. j_tsalas@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The dosimetric calculations in CT examinations are currently based on two quantities: the volume weighted CT dose index (CTDI(vol)) and the dose-length product (DLP). The first quantity is dependent on the exposure factors, scan field of view, collimation and pitch factor selections, whereas the second is additionally dependent on the scan length. METHODS: In this study a method for the calculation of these quantities from digital imaging and communication in medicine (DICOM) CT images is presented that allows an objective audit of patient doses. This method was based on software that has been developed to enable the automatic extraction of the DICOM header information of each image (relating to the parameters that affect the aforementioned quantities) into a spreadsheet with embedded functions for calculating the contribution of each image to the CTDI(vol) and DLP values. The applicability and accuracy of this method was investigated using data from actual examinations carried out in three different multislice CT scanners. These examinations have been performed with the automatic exposure control systems activated, and therefore the tube current and tube loading values varied during the scans. RESULTS: The calculated DLP values were in good agreement (±5%) with the displayed values. The calculated average CDTI(vol) values were in similar agreement with the displayed CTDI(vol) values but only for two of the three scanners. In the other scanner the displayed CTDI(vol) values were found to be overestimated by about 25%. As an additional application of this method the differences among the tube modulation techniques used by the three CT scanners were investigated. CONCLUSION: This method is a useful tool for radiation dose surveys.
OBJECTIVE: The dosimetric calculations in CT examinations are currently based on two quantities: the volume weighted CT dose index (CTDI(vol)) and the dose-length product (DLP). The first quantity is dependent on the exposure factors, scan field of view, collimation and pitch factor selections, whereas the second is additionally dependent on the scan length. METHODS: In this study a method for the calculation of these quantities from digital imaging and communication in medicine (DICOM) CT images is presented that allows an objective audit of patient doses. This method was based on software that has been developed to enable the automatic extraction of the DICOM header information of each image (relating to the parameters that affect the aforementioned quantities) into a spreadsheet with embedded functions for calculating the contribution of each image to the CTDI(vol) and DLP values. The applicability and accuracy of this method was investigated using data from actual examinations carried out in three different multislice CT scanners. These examinations have been performed with the automatic exposure control systems activated, and therefore the tube current and tube loading values varied during the scans. RESULTS: The calculated DLP values were in good agreement (±5%) with the displayed values. The calculated average CDTI(vol) values were in similar agreement with the displayed CTDI(vol) values but only for two of the three scanners. In the other scanner the displayed CTDI(vol) values were found to be overestimated by about 25%. As an additional application of this method the differences among the tube modulation techniques used by the three CT scanners were investigated. CONCLUSION: This method is a useful tool for radiation dose surveys.
Authors: Ioannis A Tsalafoutas; Virginia Tsapaki; Charicleia Triantopoulou; Akrivi Gorantonaki; John Papailiou Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Ioannis A Tsalafoutas; Virginia Tsapaki; Charikleia Triantopoulou; Christina Pouli; Virginia Kouridou; Ioanna Fagadaki; John Papailiou Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Chang Hyun Lee; Jin Mo Goo; Hyun Ju Ye; Sung-Joon Ye; Chang Min Park; Eun Ju Chun; Jung-Gi Im Journal: Radiographics Date: 2008 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Margarita Chevalier; Pilar Morán; José I Ten; José M Fernández Soto; T Cepeda; Eliseo Vañó Journal: Med Phys Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 4.071
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
Authors: Samuel J Weisenthal; Les Folio; William Kovacs; Ari Seff; Vana Derderian; Ronald M Summers; Jianhua Yao Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Yin-Ping Su; Hao-Wei Niu; Jun-Bo Chen; Ying-Hua Fu; Guo-Bing Xiao; Quan-Fu Sun Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 3.390