Literature DB >> 28074019

Point Organ Radiation Dose in Abdominal CT: Effect of Patient Off-Centering in an Experimental Human Cadaver Study.

Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja1, Sarabjeet Singh1, Atul Padole1, Alexi Otrakji1, Diego Lira1, Da Zhang1, Bob Liu1, Andrew Primak2, George Xu3, Mannudeep K Kalra1.   

Abstract

To determine the effect of patient off-centering on point organ radiation dose measurements in a human cadaver scanned with routine abdominal CT protocol. A human cadaver (88 years, body-mass-index 20 kg/m2) was scanned with routine abdominal CT protocol on 128-slice dual source MDCT (Definition Flash, Siemens). A total of 18 scans were performed using two scan protocols (a) 120 kV-200 mAs fixed-mA (CTDIvol 14 mGy) (b) 120 kV-125 ref mAs (7 mGy) with automatic exposure control (AEC, CareDose 4D) at three different positions (a) gantry isocenter, (b) upward off-centering and (c) downward off-centering. Scanning was repeated three times at each position. Six thimble (in liver, stomach, kidney, pancreas, colon and urinary bladder) and four MOSFET dosimeters (on cornea, thyroid, testicle and breast) were placed for calculation of measured point organ doses. Organ dose estimations were retrieved from dose-tracking software (eXposure, Radimetrics). Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance. There was a significant difference between the trends of point organ doses with AEC and fixed-mA at all three positions (p < 0.01). Variation in point doses between fixed-mA and AEC protocols were statistically significant across all organs at all Table positions (p < 0.001). There was up to 5-6% decrease in point doses with upward off-centering and in downward off-centering. There were statistical significant differences in point doses from dosimeters and dose-tracking software (mean difference for internal organs, 5-36% for fixed-mA &amp; 7-48% for AEC protocols; p < 0.001; mean difference for surface organs, >92% for both protocols; p < 0.0001). For both protocols, the highest mean difference in point doses was found for stomach and lowest for colon. Measured absorbed point doses in abdominal CT vary with patient-centering in the gantry isocenter. Due to lack of consideration of patient positioning in the dose estimation on automatic software-over estimation of the doses up to 92% was reported.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28074019      PMCID: PMC5927332          DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncw371

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry        ISSN: 0144-8420            Impact factor:   0.972


  20 in total

1.  Analysis of surface dose variation in CT procedures.

Authors:  P Avilés Lucas; I A Castellano; D R Dance; E Vañó Carruana
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Validation of metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor technology for organ dose assessment during CT: comparison with thermoluminescent dosimetry.

Authors:  Terry T Yoshizumi; Philip C Goodman; Donald P Frush; Giao Nguyen; Greta Toncheva; Maksudur Sarder; Lottie Barnes
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Efficient use of automatic exposure control systems in computed tomography requires correct patient positioning.

Authors:  J Gudjonsdottir; J R Svensson; S Campling; P C Brennan; B Jonsdottir
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.990

5.  Effect of patient centering on patient dose and image noise in chest CT.

Authors:  Touko Kaasalainen; Kirsi Palmu; Vappu Reijonen; Mika Kortesniemi
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Ultra low-dose chest CT using filtered back projection: comparison of 80-, 100- and 120 kVp protocols in a prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja; Sarabjeet Singh; Rachna Madan; Amita Sharma; Atul Padole; Sarvenaz Pourjabbar; Subba Digumarthy; Jo-Anne Shepard; Mannudeep K Kalra
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  In vitro dose measurements in a human cadaver with abdomen/pelvis CT scans.

Authors:  Da Zhang; Atul Padole; Xinhua Li; Sarabjeet Singh; Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja; Diego Lira; Tianyu Liu; Jim Q Shi; Alexi Otrakji; Mannudeep K Kalra; X George Xu; Bob Liu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Impact of miscentering on patient dose and image noise in x-ray CT imaging: phantom and clinical studies.

Authors:  M A Habibzadeh; M R Ay; A R Kamali Asl; H Ghadiri; H Zaidi
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 2.685

9.  The influence of patient centering on CT dose and image noise.

Authors:  Thomas Toth; Zhanyu Ge; Michael P Daly
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Role of compressive sensing technique in dose reduction for chest computed tomography: a prospective blinded clinical study.

Authors:  Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja; Sarabjeet Singh; Diego Lira; Rolf Bippus; Synho Do; Atul Padole; Sarvenaz Pourjabbar; Thomas Koehler; Jo-Anne Shepard; Mannudeep K Kalra
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.826

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Low-Dose Computed Tomography for the Optimization of Radiation Dose Exposure in Patients with Crohn's Disease.

Authors:  Richard G Kavanagh; John O'Grady; Brian W Carey; Patrick D McLaughlin; Siobhan B O'Neill; Michael M Maher; Owen J O'Connor
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.260

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.