Literature DB >> 33274400

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

Philipp Roser1,2, Annette Birkhold3, Alexander Preuhs4, Philipp Ochs3, Elizaveta Stepina3, Norbert Strobel5, Markus Kowarschik3, Rebecca Fahrig3, Andreas Maier4,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: As the spectrum of X-ray procedures has increased both for diagnostic and for interventional cases, more attention is paid to X-ray dose management. While the medical benefit to the patient outweighs the risk of radiation injuries in almost all cases, reproducible studies on organ dose values help to plan preventive measures helping both patient as well as staff. Dose studies are either carried out retrospectively, experimentally using anthropomorphic phantoms, or computationally. When performed experimentally, it is helpful to combine them with simulations validating the measurements. In this paper, we show how such a dose simulation method, carried out together with actual X-ray experiments, can be realized to obtain reliable organ dose values efficiently.
METHODS: A Monte Carlo simulation technique was developed combining down-sampling and super-resolution techniques for accelerated processing accompanying X-ray dose measurements. The target volume is down-sampled using the statistical mode first. The estimated dose distribution is then up-sampled using guided filtering and the high-resolution target volume as guidance image. Second, we present a comparison of dose estimates calculated with our Monte Carlo code experimentally obtained values for an anthropomorphic phantom using metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor dosimeters.
RESULTS: We reconstructed high-resolution dose distributions from coarse ones (down-sampling factor 2 to 16) with error rates ranging from 1.62 % to 4.91 %. Using down-sampled target volumes further reduced the computation time by 30 % to 60 %. Comparison of measured results to simulated dose values demonstrated high agreement with an average percentage error of under [Formula: see text] for all measurement points.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that Monte Carlo methods can be accelerated hardware-independently and still yield reliable results. This facilitates empirical dose studies that make use of online Monte Carlo simulations to easily cross-validate dose estimates on-site.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anthropomorphic phantom; Dosimetry; MOSFET; Monte Carlo simulation

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33274400      PMCID: PMC7822800          DOI: 10.1007/s11548-020-02298-6

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


  29 in total

1.  Skin dose mapping for fluoroscopically guided interventions.

Authors:  Perry B Johnson; David Borrego; Stephen Balter; Kevin Johnson; Daniel Siragusa; Wesley E Bolch
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Diagnostic reference levels.

Authors:  Jenia Vassileva; Madan Rehani
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 3.  Severe skin reactions from interventional fluoroscopy: case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  L K Wagner; M D McNeese; M V Marx; E L Siegel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Practical ways to reduce radiation dose for patients and staff during device implantations and electrophysiological procedures.

Authors:  Hein Heidbuchel; Fred H M Wittkampf; Eliseo Vano; Sabine Ernst; Richard Schilling; Eugenio Picano; Lluis Mont; Pierre Jais; Joseph de Bono; Christopher Piorkowski; Eduardo Saad; Francisco Femenia
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 5.214

Review 5.  Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures.

Authors:  J Valentin
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2000

6.  [Radiation-induced temporary hair loss after endovascular embolization of the cerebral arteries: six cases].

Authors:  M D'incan; H Roger; J Gabrillargues; S Mansard; S Parent; J Chazal; B Irthum; P Souteyrand
Journal:  Ann Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 0.777

Review 7.  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

8.  The European Directive on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionising radiation in relation to medical exposures (97/43/EURATOM).

Authors:  D Teunen
Journal:  J Radiol Prot       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.394

9.  Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study: part I: overall measures of dose.

Authors:  Donald L Miller; Stephen Balter; Patricia E Cole; Hollington T Lu; Beth A Schueler; Michael Geisinger; Alejandro Berenstein; Robin Albert; Jeffrey D Georgia; Patrick T Noonan; John F Cardella; James St George; Eric J Russell; Tim W Malisch; Robert L Vogelzang; George L Miller; Jon Anderson
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.464

10.  Radiation-Induced Skin Injuries to Patients: What the Interventional Radiologist Needs to Know.

Authors:  Werner Jaschke; Matthias Schmuth; Annalisa Trianni; Gabriel Bartal
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 2.740

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.