Literature DB >> 26429242

Monte Carlo reference data sets for imaging research: Executive summary of the report of AAPM Research Committee Task Group 195.

Ioannis Sechopoulos1, Elsayed S M Ali2, Andreu Badal3, Aldo Badano3, John M Boone4, Iacovos S Kyprianou3, Ernesto Mainegra-Hing5, Kyle L McMillan6, Michael F McNitt-Gray6, D W O Rogers7, Ehsan Samei8, Adam C Turner6.   

Abstract

The use of Monte Carlo simulations in diagnostic medical imaging research is widespread due to its flexibility and ability to estimate quantities that are challenging to measure empirically. However, any new Monte Carlo simulation code needs to be validated before it can be used reliably. The type and degree of validation required depends on the goals of the research project, but, typically, such validation involves either comparison of simulation results to physical measurements or to previously published results obtained with established Monte Carlo codes. The former is complicated due to nuances of experimental conditions and uncertainty, while the latter is challenging due to typical graphical presentation and lack of simulation details in previous publications. In addition, entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations in general involves a steep learning curve. It is not a simple task to learn how to program and interpret a Monte Carlo simulation, even when using one of the publicly available code packages. This Task Group report provides a common reference for benchmarking Monte Carlo simulations across a range of Monte Carlo codes and simulation scenarios. In the report, all simulation conditions are provided for six different Monte Carlo simulation cases that involve common x-ray based imaging research areas. The results obtained for the six cases using four publicly available Monte Carlo software packages are included in tabular form. In addition to a full description of all simulation conditions and results, a discussion and comparison of results among the Monte Carlo packages and the lessons learned during the compilation of these results are included. This abridged version of the report includes only an introductory description of the six cases and a brief example of the results of one of the cases. This work provides an investigator the necessary information to benchmark his/her Monte Carlo simulation software against the reference cases included here before performing his/her own novel research. In addition, an investigator entering the field of Monte Carlo simulations can use these descriptions and results as a self-teaching tool to ensure that he/she is able to perform a specific simulation correctly. Finally, educators can assign these cases as learning projects as part of course objectives or training programs.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26429242     DOI: 10.1118/1.4928676

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


  13 in total

1.  Breast dose in mammography is about 30% lower when realistic heterogeneous glandular distributions are considered.

Authors:  Andrew M Hernandez; J Anthony Seibert; John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Average glandular dose coefficients for pendant-geometry breast CT using realistic breast phantoms.

Authors:  Andrew M Hernandez; John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-08-20       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms.

Authors:  Rongping Zeng; Aldo Badano; Kyle J Myers
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Pitfalls in interventional X-ray organ dose assessment-combined experimental and computational phantom study: application to prostatic artery embolization.

Authors:  Philipp Roser; Annette Birkhold; Xia Zhong; Philipp Ochs; Elizaveta Stepina; Markus Kowarschik; Rebecca Fahrig; Andreas Maier
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-08-03       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  A Monte Carlo model for mean glandular dose evaluation in spot compression mammography.

Authors:  Antonio Sarno; David R Dance; Ruben E van Engen; Kenneth C Young; Paolo Russo; Francesca Di Lillo; Giovanni Mettivier; Kristina Bliznakova; Baowei Fei; Ioannis Sechopoulos
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  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

7.  Estimating lung, breast, and effective dose from low-dose lung cancer screening CT exams with tube current modulation across a range of patient sizes.

Authors:  Anthony J Hardy; Maryam Bostani; Kyle McMillan; Maria Zankl; Cynthia McCollough; Chris Cagnon; Michael McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Generation and analysis of clinically relevant breast imaging x-ray spectra.

Authors:  Andrew M Hernandez; J Anthony Seibert; Anita Nosratieh; John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Deterministic linear Boltzmann transport equation solver for patient-specific CT dose estimation: Comparison against a Monte Carlo benchmark for realistic scanner configurations and patient models.

Authors:  Sara Principi; Adam Wang; Alexander Maslowski; Todd Wareing; Petr Jordan; Taly Gilat Schmidt
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Reference dataset for benchmarking fetal doses derived from Monte Carlo simulations of CT exams.

Authors:  Anthony J Hardy; Maryam Bostani; Erin Angel; Chris Cagnon; Ioannis Sechopoulos; Michael F McNitt-Gray
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2020-11-28       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.