| Literature DB >> 36034103 |
Tadelech S Mekonin1, Tilahun T Deressu1.
Abstract
A computed tomography dose index can be used to quantify the radiation dose received during a CT scan and it is an indicator of the radiation dose to the polymetaylenmetaAcrylate (PMMA) standardized phantom. The objective of this study was 2-fold. The first was to measure the computed tomography (CT) radiation dose for the head and body polymetaylelenmetaAcrylate (PMMA) phantoms and to determine the accuracy of the CT radiation dose parameter displayed on the CT scanner console; these were measured in this investigation and compared with the dose displayed on the CT scanner console. The dose was calculated using the formalism described in the American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM) Report 96. The second was to compare the dosimetric results of the head and body polymetaylelenmetaAcrylate (PMMA) phantoms with dose reference levels published in international journals, as well as to measure the central cumulative dose (DL' (0)), as recommended by the American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM) report 111. This is a new, cutting-edge methodology for estimating the CT radiation dosage provided by the abdomen, thorax, and head of a PMMA phantom. We used a Philips Big Bore CT scanner with 16 slices. A CT dosimeter head phantom with a diameter of 16 cm, a CT dosimeter body phantom with a diameter of 32 cm, a 100 mm pencil chamber (PC), and a 20 mm short chamber (SC) were employed. These were coupled to an electrometer and a dosimetric readout device. The measured volume computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol) values were in good agreement with the CT radiation dose displayed on the corresponding CT scanner console. The percentage disagreement was less than 10%, with a maximal difference of 1.7% and 5.5% for the body and head phantom, respectively. The central cumulative dose (DL (0)) measurements (for L' = 100 mm) also matched nominal or the corresponding computed tomography dose index (CT) scanner console volume computed tomography dose index (CTDIvol) values. In this case, the agreement is always below 3% for abdomen scans and 1.0% for head examinations. This result implies that the radiation dose supplied by the 16-slice computed tomography (CT) system was in good agreement with the international dose reference level and we observed something different.Entities:
Keywords: computed tomography dose index; computed tomography scan; dosimetric reference levels; radiation dose
Year: 2022 PMID: 36034103 PMCID: PMC9403463 DOI: 10.1177/15593258221119299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dose Response ISSN: 1559-3258 Impact factor: 2.623
Figure 1.The typical dose profile in a sequential computed tomography (CT) examination is moving along the z-axis. The dose in the slice of interest is calculated by adding the contributions in the slice.
Figure 2.The pencil chamber (PC) reading averages the Rx (X-ray) contributions over its length, L.
Figure 3.Set-up for CTDI determination.
Normalized Measured CTDI in free air for Different Voltages (kV), Tube Charges (mAs), and X-Ray Slice Collimations (mm).
| Voltage (kV) | Charge (mAs) | Rx (X-ray) slice thickness (mm) | PC Readings (mGy) | Normal. CTDI in free air (mGy) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90 | 100 | 24 | 1.53 | 6.4 |
| 120 | 100 | 24 | 3.27 | 13.6 |
| 140 | 200 | 24 | 4.76 | 19.8 |
| 120 | 100 | 24 | 3.27 | 13.6 |
| 120 | 200 | 24 | 6.54 | 13.6 |
| 120 | 400 | 24 | 13 | 13.5 |
| 120 | 100 | 24 | 3.27 | 13.6 |
| 120 | 100 | 12 | 1.86 | 15.5 |
| 120 | 100 | 6 | 1.02 | 17.0 |
| 120 | 100 | 3 | .73 | 24.4 |
Figure 4.Normalized computed tomography dose index (CTDI) in free air (mGy) for different Rx (x-ray) slice thicknesses.
Percentage Disagreement Between CTDIvol Measurements And The Reported Result Of The Corresponding Dose Displayed on the console (Nominal CTDIvol on the CT Console).
| Body region | PC readings at different phantom locations (mGy) | CTDIvol (mGy) | CTDI disagreement (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Center | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 | Calculated | Displayed | ||
| Head | 2.29 | 2.48 | 2.31 | 2.46 | 2.60 | 10.0 | 10.2 | 1.7 |
| Body | .77 | 1.81 | 1.48 | 1.82 | 1.65 | 5.8 | 6.1 | 5.5 |
Comparison of the Measured Central Cumulative Dose (DL′(0)) to the Dose Displayed on the Console.
| Exam | Charge (mAs/sl) | Pitch (unit less) | SC readings in different phantom locations (mGy) | Measured DL′ (0) (mGy) | Displayed CTDIvol (mGy) | DL′ (0)-CTDIvol Disag. (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Center | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 | ||||||
| Abdomen | 220 | 1.188 | 6.92 | 13.85 | 13.92 | 14.49 | 15.3 | 11.9 | 11.6 | −2.5 |
| Thorax | 200 | 1.063 | 6.10 | 13.69 | 11.79 | 13.72 | 13.48 | 10.8 | 10.6 | −2.0 |
| Head | 550 | .313 | 52.28 | 57.2 | 53.16 | 57.44 | 61.28 | 55.6 | 55.9 | 0.5 |
Comparison of the Dosimetric Results of the Head and Body Phantom with International Dose Reference Levels.
| Examination | CTDIvol (mGy) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This study | Europe (2004) | UK (2003) | ACR (2008) | Norway (2018) | Sweden (2019) | |
| Body | 5.8 | 15 | 14 | 25 | 13 | 12 |
| Head | 10.0 | 60 | 65 | 75 | 60 | 60 |