Polymethyl Methacrylate Phantom on CT Imaging to Evaluate Size-Specific Effective Dose in Pediatric and Adult Body
International Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering
Volume 3, Issue 6, December 2015, Pages: 82-88
Received: Dec. 4, 2015; Accepted: Dec. 14, 2015; Published: Dec. 30, 2015
Views 4294      Downloads 139
Authors
Alamgir Hossain, Department of Physics, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Bangladesh
Samiron Kumar Saha, Department of Physics, Pabna University of Science & Technology, Pabna, Bangladesh
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Background: Computed tomography (CT) scan is very important for the measurement of effective dose. A patient size-dependent factor is used to estimate patient dose from scanner output indices for patients of different sizes. The size dependent factor is used over a range of patient sizes, and extends to adult and pediatric patients as well as obese ones. Objective: This research was performed the estimation of size-specific effective dose during CT scan of brain of patients by using PMMA 16 cm reference phantom for treatment planning. Materials and methods: We were included pediatric and adult body patients and Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) Phantom to evaluate size specific effective dose. We were used AAPM Report No. 204 as protocol in all the works. To measure size specific effective dose, we were used Lateral (LA), anterior posterior (AP), and effective diameter of the patients with reference Phantom PMMA 32 cm on CT imaging. Results: The effective dose had been calculated for different patients after CT scan of head or brain. To estimate the size-specific effective dose, different parameters like (AP), lateral (LAT), AP+LAT dimension, effective diameter, dose length product (DLP) and size specific dose estimate (SSDE) had been calculated. The estimated value of effective dose was in the range of (346-587) mSv. The relations of effective diameter with AP, LAT, AP+LAT dimension, SSDE and age of the patients had been analyzed. Conclusion: By knowing the effective diameter of the slice of patient’s CT image, a doctor can easily estimate the size-specific effective dose for CT scan of the patients. It was also noted that without knowing effective diameter, a doctor or medical physicist can estimate the size-specific effective dose depend on the patient’s age.
Keywords
Computed Tomography, Size Specific Effective Dose, PMMA Phantom
To cite this article
Alamgir Hossain, Samiron Kumar Saha, Polymethyl Methacrylate Phantom on CT Imaging to Evaluate Size-Specific Effective Dose in Pediatric and Adult Body, International Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering. Vol. 3, No. 6, 2015, pp. 82-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbse.20150306.13
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Mettler FA, Wiest PW, Locken JA et al (2000) CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiat Prot20(4):353–359.
[2]
Bogdanich W (2009) Radiation overdoses point op dangers of CT scans. The New York Times; 15, October. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/us/16radiation.html.
[3]
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2010) White Paper: Initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging. Silver Springs, MD; 2010. Available from:http://www.fda.gov/radiation-emittingproducts/radiationsafety/radiationdosereduction/ucm199904.htm.
[4]
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007) Computed tomography - an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 357(22):2277–2284.
[5]
NCRP (2009) Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. NCRP report no.160. Bethesda (MD): National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
[6]
Patterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF et al (2001) Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR 176(2):297–301.
[7]
Donnelly LF, Emery A, Brody AS, et al. (2001) Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single detector helical CT: strategies at a large Children’s Hospital. AJR 176(2):303–306.
[8]
Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ net al (2001) Estimated risk of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR 176(2):289–296.
[9]
Brenner DJ, Elliston CD (2004) Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiol 232(3):735–738.
[10]
NRC (1990) Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
[11]
NRC (2005) Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2. Washington DC: National Academies Press.
[12]
Mettler FAJr, Wiest PW, Locken JA et al Kelsey CA. (2000) CT scanning: patterns of use and dose.J Radial Prot 20(4):353-359.
[13]
SlovisTL (2002) The ALARA concept in pediatric CT: myth or reality? Radiology 223:5-6.
[14]
Berdon WE, Slovis TL (2002) Where we are since ALARA andthe series of articles on CT dosein children and risk of long-term cancers: what has changed? Pediatr Radio32:699.
[15]
Linton OW, Mettler FA (2003) National conference on dose reduction in CT, with an emphasis on pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol181:321-329.
[16]
Shope T, Gagne R, Johnson G (1981) A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys8:488-495.
[17]
Dixon RL (2003) A new look at CT dose measurement: Beyond CTDI. Med Phys 30(6):1272-1280.
[18]
Boone JM (2007) The trouble with CTD1100. Med Phys 34(4):1364-1371.
[19]
McCollough CH (2008) CT dose: how to measure, how to reduce. Health Phys 95(5):508-517.
[20]
McNitt-Gray MF (2002) APM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT. Radio Graphics 22(6): 1541-1553.
[21]
AAPM 2008 Report of AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee: the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT AAPM Report No. 96 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine).
[22]
IEC (2002) Medical Electrical Equipment. Part 2-44: Particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for computed tomography. IEC publication No. 60601-2-44. Ed. 2.1, International Electrotechnical Commission (I EC) Central Office: Geneva, Switzerland.
[23]
Hill B, Venning AJ, Baldock C (2005) A preliminary study of the novel application of normoxic polymer gel dosimeters for the measurement of CTDI on diagnostic x-ray CT scanners. Med.Phys32:1589-1597.
[24]
Rothenberg LN, Pentlow KS (2000) CT dosimetry and radiation safety, Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Phyics. CT and US Cross-sectional Imaging171-188.
[25]
Geleijns J, Salvadó MA, Bruin PW et al (2009) Computed tomography dose assessment for a 160 mm wide, 320 detector row, cone beam CT scanner. PhysMed Biol54: 3141-3159.
[26]
AAPM (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations AAPM Report No 204 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine) 3.
[27]
AAPM (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations AAPM Report No 204 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine) 4.
[28]
AAPM (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations AAPM Report No 204 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine) 13-19.
[29]
AAPM (2010) Report of AAPM Task Group 111: The future of CT dosimetry: comprehensive methodology for the evaluation of radiation dose in x-ray computed tomography AAPM Report No 111 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine).
[30]
Galanski M, Hidajat N, Maier W et al (2000)Radiation exposure in computed tomography. 4th ed. Hamburg, Germany: CTB Publications.
[31]
McNitt-Gray MF (2002) AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT-radiation dose in CT. RadioGraphics22:1541-1553.
[32]
IEC (2003) International standard of 60601-2-44 Ed2 Amendment 1: medical electrical equipment, Part 2-44-particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for computed tomography. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission.
[33]
ICRP (2000) Recommendations of the international commission on Radiological protection30:7-45.
[34]
Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA et al (2006) National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol79:968-980.
[35]
ICRP (2007) Recommendations of the international commission on Radiological protection. ICRP Publication 103, New York.
[36]
Robb RA (1982) X-ray computed tomography: from basic principles to applications. Annual Review of Biophysics and Bioengineering 11:177-201.
[37]
AAPM (2011) Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations AAPM Report No 204 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine) 10-11.
[38]
AAPM (2008) Report of AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee: the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT AAPM Report No. 96 (City Park, MD: American Association of Physicist in Medicine) 13.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186