Literature DB >> 28526893

Do we need 3D tube current modulation information for accurate organ dosimetry in chest CT? Protocols dose comparisons.

Xochitl Lopez-Rendon1, Guozhi Zhang2, Walter Coudyzer2, Wim Develter3, Hilde Bosmans3,2, Federica Zanca2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the lung and breast dose associated with three chest protocols: standard, organ-based tube current modulation (OBTCM) and fast-speed scanning; and to estimate the error associated with organ dose when modelling the longitudinal (z-) TCM versus the 3D-TCM in Monte Carlo simulations (MC) for these three protocols.
METHOD: Five adult and three paediatric cadavers with different BMI were scanned. The CTDIvol of the OBTCM and the fast-speed protocols were matched to the patient-specific CTDIvol of the standard protocol. Lung and breast doses were estimated using MC with both z- and 3D-TCM simulated and compared between protocols.
RESULTS: The fast-speed scanning protocol delivered the highest doses. A slight reduction for breast dose (up to 5.1%) was observed for two of the three female cadavers with the OBTCM in comparison to the standard. For both adult and paediatric, the implementation of the z-TCM data only for organ dose estimation resulted in 10.0% accuracy for the standard and fast-speed protocols, while relative dose differences were up to 15.3% for the OBTCM protocol.
CONCLUSION: At identical CTDIvol values, the standard protocol delivered the lowest overall doses. Only for the OBTCM protocol is the 3D-TCM needed if an accurate (<10.0%) organ dosimetry is desired. KEY POINTS: • The z-TCM information is sufficient for accurate dosimetry for standard protocols. • The z-TCM information is sufficient for accurate dosimetry for fast-speed scanning protocols. • For organ-based TCM schemes, the 3D-TCM information is necessary for accurate dosimetry. • At identical CTDI vol , the fast-speed scanning protocol delivered the highest doses. • Lung dose was higher in XCare than standard protocol at identical CTDI vol .

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D tube current modulation; Cadavers; Longitudinal tube current modulation; Monte Carlo simulations; Organ doses

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28526893     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-4863-3

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


  18 in total

1.  Radiation dose estimations to the thorax using organ-based dose modulation.

Authors:  Matthew P Lungren; Terry T Yoshizumi; Samuel M Brady; Greta Toncheva; Colin Anderson-Evans; Carolyn Lowry; Xiaodong R Zhou; Donald Frush; Lynne M Hurwitz
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 2.  Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi-detector row CT.

Authors:  Andrew N Primak; Cynthia H McCollough; Michael R Bruesewitz; Jie Zhang; Joel G Fletcher
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

3.  A comparison of methods to estimate organ doses in CT when utilizing approximations to the tube current modulation function.

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

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.  The effect of angular and longitudinal tube current modulations on the estimation of organ and effective doses in x-ray computed tomography.

Authors:  Marcel van Straten; Paul Deak; Paul C Shrimpton; Willi A Kalender
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Dose reduction of the female breast in chest CT.

Authors:  Anna Seidenfuss; Andreas Mayr; Matthias Schmid; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Dose reduction to anterior surfaces with organ-based tube-current modulation: evaluation of performance in a phantom study.

Authors:  Xinhui Duan; Jia Wang; Jodie A Christner; Shuai Leng; Katharine L Grant; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Monte Carlo modeling for dose assessment in cone beam CT for oral and maxillofacial applications.

Authors:  G Zhang; N Marshall; R Bogaerts; R Jacobs; H Bosmans
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Implementing the complete beam hardening effect of the bowtie filter versus scaling beam intensities: effects on dosimetric applications in computed tomography.

Authors:  Xochitl Lopez-Rendon; Guozhi Zhang; Hilde Bosmans; Raymond Oyen; Federica Zanca
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2014-12-30

10.  The profound effects of patient arm positioning on organ doses from CT procedures calculated using Monte Carlo simulations and deformable phantoms.

Authors:  Haikuan Liu; Yiming Gao; Aiping Ding; Peter F Caracappa; X George Xu
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 0.972

View more
  1 in total

1.  A comparison of breast and lung doses from chest CT scans using organ-based tube current modulation (OBTCM) vs. Automatic tube current modulation (ATCM).

Authors:  Rick R Layman; Anthony J Hardy; Hyun J Kim; Ei Ne Chou; Maryam Bostani; Chris Cagnon; Dianna Cody; Michael McNitt-Gray
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 2.102

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.