Literature DB >> 25680725

Effective dose and organ doses estimation taking tube current modulation into account with a commercial software package.

X Lopez-Rendon1, H Bosmans, R Oyen, F Zanca.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of including tube current modulation (TCM) versus using the average mAs in estimating organ and effective dose (E) using commercial software.
METHOD: Forty adult patients (24 females, 16 males) with normal BMI underwent chest/abdomen computed tomography (CT) performed with TCM at 120 kVp, reference mAs of 110 (chest) and 200 (abdomen). Doses to fully irradiated organs (breasts, lungs, stomach, liver and ovaries) and E were calculated using two versions of a dosimetry software: v.2.0, which uses the average mAs, and v.2.2, which accounts for TCM by implementing a gender-specific mAs profile. Student's t-test was used to assess statistically significant differences between organ doses calculated with the two versions.
RESULTS: A statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) was found for E on chest and abdomen CT, with E being lower by 4.2% when TCM is considered. Similarly, organ doses were also significantly lower (p < 0.001): 13.7% for breasts, 7.3% for lungs, 9.1% for the liver and 8.5% for the stomach. Only the dose to the ovaries was higher with TCM (11.5%).
CONCLUSION: When TCM is used, for the stylized phantom, the doses to lungs, breasts, stomach and liver decreased while the dose to the ovaries increased. KEY POINTS: • Estimated dose to the ovaries increased with TCM. • Estimated dose to lungs, breasts, stomach and liver decreased with TCM. • A unique but gender-specific mAs profile resulted in a radiation dose shift. • Even for normal size patients there is a variety in mAs profiles.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25680725     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3623-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  16 in total

1.  Comparison of Z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique with fixed tube current CT scanning of abdomen and pelvis.

Authors:  Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Ravi S Kamath; Elkan F Halpern; Sanjay Saini
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Estimated radiation dose associated with low-dose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  Frederick J Larke; Randell L Kruger; Christopher H Cagnon; Michael J Flynn; Michael M McNitt-Gray; Xizeng Wu; Phillip F Judy; Dianna D Cody
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Utilizing a simple CT dosimetry phantom for the comprehension of the operational characteristics of CT AEC systems.

Authors:  Ioannis A Tsalafoutas; Athanasios Varsamidis; Stella Thalassinou; Efstathios P Efstathopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 4.  State of the art: technologies for computed tomography dose reduction.

Authors:  Martin L D Gunn; Jennifer R Kohr
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2009-11-20

5.  Excess radiation and organ dose in chest and abdominal CT due to CT acquisition beyond expected anatomical boundaries.

Authors:  Federica Zanca; Martine Demeter; Raymond Oyen; Hilde Bosmans
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Should we be concerned about the rapid increase in CT usage?

Authors:  David J Brenner
Journal:  Rev Environ Health       Date:  2010 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 3.458

7.  Effective dose estimation in whole-body multislice CT in paediatric trauma patients.

Authors:  Robin D Munk; Peter C Strohm; Ulrich Saueressig; Joern Zwingmann; Markus Uhl; Norbert P Südkamp; Elmar Kotter; Mathias Langer; Thorsten A Bley
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2009-01-16

8.  Dose to radiosensitive organs during routine chest CT: effects of tube current modulation.

Authors:  Erin Angel; Nazanin Yaghmai; Cecilia Matilda Jude; John J DeMarco; Christopher H Cagnon; Jonathan G Goldin; Cynthia H McCollough; Andrew N Primak; Dianna D Cody; Donna M Stevens; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  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

10.  Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Mark S Pearce; Jane A Salotti; Mark P Little; Kieran McHugh; Choonsik Lee; Kwang Pyo Kim; Nicola L Howe; Cecile M Ronckers; Preetha Rajaraman; Alan W Sir Craft; Louise Parker; Amy Berrington de González
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  2 in total

1.  Diagnostic yield of 90-kVp low-tube-voltage carotid and intracerebral CT-angiography: effects on radiation dose, image quality and diagnostic performance for the detection of carotid stenosis.

Authors:  Doris Leithner; Julian L Wichmann; Scherwin Mahmoudi; Simon S Martin; Moritz H Albrecht; Thomas J Vogl; Jan-Erik Scholtz
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Third-generation dual-source CT of the neck using automated tube voltage adaptation in combination with advanced modeled iterative reconstruction: evaluation of image quality and radiation dose.

Authors:  Jan-Erik Scholtz; Julian L Wichmann; Kristina Hüsers; Moritz H Albrecht; Martin Beeres; Ralf W Bauer; Thomas J Vogl; Boris Bodelle
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.