Feasibility of using the computed tomography dose indices to estimate radiation dose to partially and fully irradiated brains in pediatric neuroradiology examinations

2015 ◽  
Vol 60 (14) ◽  
pp. 5699-5710 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Januzis ◽  
Giao Nguyen ◽  
Donald P Frush ◽  
Jenny K Hoang ◽  
Carolyn Lowry ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (10) ◽  
pp. 1247-1253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola Maria Cannaò ◽  
Francesco Secchi ◽  
Marco Alì ◽  
Ida Daniela D'Angelo ◽  
Marco Scarabello ◽  
...  

Background Cardiovascular computed tomography (CCT) technology is rapidly advancing allowing to perform good quality examinations with a radiation dose as low as 1.2 mSv. However, latest generation scanners are not available in all centers. Purpose To estimate radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CCT using a standard 64-slice scanner. Material and Methods A total of 100 patients aged 6.9 ± 5.4 years (mean ± standard deviation) who underwent a 64-slice CCT scan using 80, 100, or 120 kVp, were retrospectively evaluated. Radiation effective dose was calculated on the basis of the dose length product. Two independent readers assessed the image quality through signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and a qualitative score (3 = very good, 2 = good, 1 = poor). Non-parametric tests were used. Results Fifty-five exams were not electrocardiographically (ECG) triggered, 20 had a prospective ECG triggering, and 25 had retrospective ECG triggering. The median effective dose was 1.3 mSv (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.8–2.7 mSv). Median SNR was 30.6 (IQR = 23.4–33.6) at 120 kVp, 29.4 (IQR = 23.7–34.8) at 100 kVp, and 24.7 (IQR = 19.4–34.3) at 80 kVp. Median CNR was 21.0 (IQR = 14.8–24.4), 19.1 (IQR = 15.6–23.9), and 25.3 (IQR = 19.4–33.4), respectively. Image quality was very good, good, and poor in 56, 39, and 5 patients, respectively. No significant differences were found among voltage groups for SNR ( P = 0.486), CNR ( P = 0.336), and subjective image quality ( P = 0.296). The inter-observer reproducibility was almost perfect (κ = 0.880). Conclusion High-quality pediatric CCT can be performed using a 64-slice scanner, with a radiation effective dose close to 2 mSv in about 50% of the cases.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Ignacio O. Romero ◽  
Changqing Li

BACKGROUND: Pencil beam X-ray luminescence computed tomography (XLCT) imaging provides superior spatial resolution than other imaging geometries like sheet beam and cone beam geometries. However, the pencil beam geometry suffers from long scan times, resulting in concerns overdose which discourages the use of pencil beam XLCT. OBJECTIVE: The dose deposited in pencil beam XLCT imaging was investigated to estimate the dose from one angular projection scan with three different X-ray sources. The dose deposited in a typical small animal XLCT imaging was investigated. METHODS: A Monte Carlo simulation platform, GATE (Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission) was used to estimate the dose from one angular projection scan of a mouse leg model with three different X-ray sources. Dose estimations from a six angular projection scan by three different X-ray source energies were performed in GATE on a mouse trunk model composed of muscle, spine bone, and a tumor. RESULTS: With the Sigray source, the bone marrow of mouse leg was estimated to have a radiation dose of 44 mGy for a typical XLCT imaging with six angular projections, a scan step size of 100 micrometers, and 106 X-ray photons per linear scan. With the Sigray X-ray source and the typical XLCT scanning parameters, we estimated the dose of spine bone, muscle tissues, and tumor structures of the mouse trunk were 38.49 mGy, 15.07 mGy, and 16.87 mGy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that an X-ray benchtop source (like the X-ray source from Sigray Inc.) with high brilliance and quasi-monochromatic properties can reduce dose concerns with the pencil beam geometry. Findings of this work can be applicable to other imaging modalities like X-ray fluorescence computed tomography if the imaging protocol consists of the pencil beam geometry.


2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 1010-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. R. Gorny ◽  
S. L. Leitzen ◽  
M. R. Bruesewitz ◽  
J. M. Kofler ◽  
N. J. Hangiandreou ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 665-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas C. Gerber ◽  
Birgit Kantor ◽  
Cynthia H. McCollough

2009 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 903-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomonari Sano ◽  
Hideyuki Matsutani ◽  
Takeshi Kondo ◽  
Takako Sekine ◽  
Takehiro Arai ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document