Literature DB >> 31377964

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

Philipp Roser1,2, Annette Birkhold3, Xia Zhong4, Philipp Ochs3, Elizaveta Stepina3, Markus Kowarschik3, Rebecca Fahrig3, Andreas Maier4,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: With X-ray radiation protection and dose management constantly gaining interest in interventional radiology, novel procedures often undergo prospective dose studies using anthropomorphic phantoms to determine expected reference organ-equivalent dose values. Due to inherent uncertainties, such as impact of exact patient positioning, generalized geometry of the phantoms, limited dosimeter positioning options, and composition of tissue-equivalent materials, these dose values might not allow for patient-specific risk assessment. Therefore, first the aim of this study is to quantify the influence of these parameters on local X-ray dose to evaluate their relevance in the assessment of patient-specific organ doses. Second, this knowledge further enables validating a simulation approach, which allows employing physiological material models and patient-specific geometries.
METHODS: Phantom dosimetry experiments using MOSFET dosimeters were conducted reproducing imaging scenarios in prostatic arterial embolization (PAE). Associated organ-equivalent dose of prostate, bladder, colon, and skin was determined. Dose deviation induced by possible small displacements of the patient was reproduced by moving the X-ray source. Dose deviation induced by geometric and material differences was investigated by analyzing two different commonly used phantoms. We reconstructed the experiments using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, a reference male geometry, and different material properties to validate simulations and experiments against each other.
RESULTS: Overall, MC-simulated organ dose values are in accordance with the measured ones for the majority of cases. Marginal displacements of X-ray source relative to the phantoms lead to deviations of 6-135% in organ dose values, while skin dose remains relatively constant. Regarding the impact of phantom material composition, underestimation of internal organ dose values by 12-20% is prevalent in all simulated phantoms. Skin dose, however, can be estimated with low deviation of 1-8% at least for two materials.
CONCLUSIONS: Prospective reference dose studies might not extend to precise patient-specific dose assessment. Therefore, online organ dose assessment tools, based on advanced patient modeling and MC methods, are desirable.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anthropomorphic phantom; Dosimetry; MOSFET; Monte Carlo simulation; Prostatic artery embolization

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31377964     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-019-02037-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  25 in total

1.  Accelerating Monte Carlo simulations of photon transport in a voxelized geometry using a massively parallel graphics processing unit.

Authors:  Andreu Badal; Aldo Badano
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Medium- and Long-Term Outcome of Prostate Artery Embolization for Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Results in 630 Patients.

Authors:  João M Pisco; Tiago Bilhim; Luis C Pinheiro; Lucia Fernandes; Jose Pereira; Nuno V Costa; Marisa Duarte; António G Oliveira
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 3.464

3.  Effective-dose estimation in interventional radiological procedures.

Authors:  Maria D Falco; Salvatore Masala; Matteo Stefanini; Paolo Bagalà; Daniele Morosetti; Eros Calabria; Alessia Tonnetti; Gianluca Verona-Rinati
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2018-03-08

Review 4.  Prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic obstruction: assessment of safety and efficacy.

Authors:  Daniel Christidis; E Clarebrough; V Ly; M Perera; H Woo; N Lawrentschuk; D Bolton
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures: a review of radiation effects on patients' skin and hair.

Authors:  Stephen Balter; John W Hopewell; Donald L Miller; Louis K Wagner; Michael J Zelefsky
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Geant4-based Monte Carlo simulations on GPU for medical applications.

Authors:  Julien Bert; Hector Perez-Ponce; Ziad El Bitar; Sébastien Jan; Yannick Boursier; Damien Vintache; Alain Bonissent; Christian Morel; David Brasse; Dimitris Visvikis
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Benign prostatic hyperplasia: prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate--a prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Yuan-an Gao; Yan Huang; Rui Zhang; Yu-dong Yang; Qing Zhang; Min Hou; Yi Wang
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Organ doses in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac-centered fluoroscopically guided interventions: Comparison of three methods for computational phantom alignment.

Authors:  Emily L Marshall; David Borrego; James C Fudge; Dhanashree Rajderkar; Wesley E Bolch
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  Methods for measuring fluoroscopic skin dose.

Authors:  Stephen Balter
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2006-09

10.  Characterization of MOSFET dosimeters for low-dose measurements in maxillofacial anthropomorphic phantoms.

Authors:  Juha H Koivisto; Jan E Wolff; Timo Kiljunen; Dirk Schulze; Mika Kortesniemi
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  1 in total

1.  XDose: toward online cross-validation of experimental and computational X-ray dose estimation.

Authors:  Philipp Roser; Annette Birkhold; Alexander Preuhs; Philipp Ochs; Elizaveta Stepina; Norbert Strobel; Markus Kowarschik; Rebecca Fahrig; Andreas Maier
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 2.924

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.