Allan Felipe Fattori Alves1, José Ricardo de Arruda Miranda2, Fernando Antonio Bacchim Neto3, Sérgio Barbosa Duarte4, Diana Rodrigues de Pina5. 1. Instituto de Biociências de Botucatu, P.O. BOX 510, Departamento de Física e Biofísica, UNESP-Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Junior S/N, Botucatu, 18618-000 São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: allan@ibb.unesp.br. 2. Instituto de Biociências de Botucatu, Departamento de Física e Biofísica, UNESP-Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Junior S/N, Botucatu, 18618-000 São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: jmiranda@ibb.unesp.br. 3. Instituto de Biociências de Botucatu, Departamento de Física e Biofísica, UNESP-Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Junior S/N, Botucatu, 18618-000 São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: fernando.bacchim@gmail.com. 4. Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas, Laboratório de Altas Energias, Dr. Xavier Sigaud, 150, Rio de Janeiro, 22290-180 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Electronic address: sbd@cbpf.br. 5. Departamento de Doenças Tropicais e Diagnóstico por Imagem, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, UNESP-Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Junior S/N, Botucatu, 18618-000 São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: drpina@fmb.unesp.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop two pediatric patient-equivalent phantoms, the Pediatric Chest Equivalent Patient (PCEP) and the Pediatric Skull Equivalent Patient (PSEP) for children aged 1 to 5 years. We also used both phantoms for image quality evaluations in computed radiography systems to determine Gold Standard (GS) techniques for pediatric patients. METHODS: To determine the simulator materials thickness (Lucite and aluminum), we quantified biological tissues (lung, soft, and bone) using an automatic computational algorithm. To objectively establish image quality levels, two physical quantities were used: effective detective quantum efficiency and contrast-to-noise ratio. These quantities were associated to values obtained for standard patients from previous studies. RESULTS: For chest radiographies, the GS technique applied was 81kVp, associated to 2.0mAs and 83.6μGy of entrance skin dose (ESD), while for skull radiographies, the GS technique was 70kVp, associated to 5mAs and 339μGy of ESD. CONCLUSION: This procedure allowed us to choose optimized techniques for pediatric protocols, thus improving quality of diagnosis for pediatric population and reducing diagnostic costs to our institution. These results could also be easily applied to other services with different equipment technologies.
OBJECTIVES: To develop two pediatric patient-equivalent phantoms, the Pediatric Chest Equivalent Patient (PCEP) and the Pediatric Skull Equivalent Patient (PSEP) for children aged 1 to 5 years. We also used both phantoms for image quality evaluations in computed radiography systems to determine Gold Standard (GS) techniques for pediatric patients. METHODS: To determine the simulator materials thickness (Lucite and aluminum), we quantified biological tissues (lung, soft, and bone) using an automatic computational algorithm. To objectively establish image quality levels, two physical quantities were used: effective detective quantum efficiency and contrast-to-noise ratio. These quantities were associated to values obtained for standard patients from previous studies. RESULTS: For chest radiographies, the GS technique applied was 81kVp, associated to 2.0mAs and 83.6μGy of entrance skin dose (ESD), while for skull radiographies, the GS technique was 70kVp, associated to 5mAs and 339μGy of ESD. CONCLUSION: This procedure allowed us to choose optimized techniques for pediatric protocols, thus improving quality of diagnosis for pediatric population and reducing diagnostic costs to our institution. These results could also be easily applied to other services with different equipment technologies.
Authors: Ana Luiza Menegatti Pavan; Maria Eugênia Dela Rosa; Guilherme Giacomini; Fernando Antonio Bacchim Neto; Seizo Yamashita; Luiz Carlos Vulcano; Sergio Barbosa Duarte; José Ricardo de Arruda Miranda; Diana Rodrigues de Pina Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-04-21 Impact factor: 3.240