Cargando…

A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods

BACKGROUND: Computed Tomography (CT) contributes up to 50% of the medical exposure to the United States population. Children are considered to be at higher risk of developing radiation-induced tumors due to the young age of exposure and increased tissue radiosensitivity. Organ dose estimation is ess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gao, Yiming, Quinn, Brian, Mahmood, Usman, Long, Daniel, Erdi, Yusuf, St. Germain, Jean, Pandit-Taskar, Neeta, Xu, X. George, Bolch, Wesley E., Dauer, Lawrence T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5406971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28446130
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-017-0199-3
_version_ 1783232071731249152
author Gao, Yiming
Quinn, Brian
Mahmood, Usman
Long, Daniel
Erdi, Yusuf
St. Germain, Jean
Pandit-Taskar, Neeta
Xu, X. George
Bolch, Wesley E.
Dauer, Lawrence T.
author_facet Gao, Yiming
Quinn, Brian
Mahmood, Usman
Long, Daniel
Erdi, Yusuf
St. Germain, Jean
Pandit-Taskar, Neeta
Xu, X. George
Bolch, Wesley E.
Dauer, Lawrence T.
author_sort Gao, Yiming
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Computed Tomography (CT) contributes up to 50% of the medical exposure to the United States population. Children are considered to be at higher risk of developing radiation-induced tumors due to the young age of exposure and increased tissue radiosensitivity. Organ dose estimation is essential for pediatric and adult patient cancer risk assessment. The objective of this study is to validate the VirtualDose software in comparison to currently available software and methods for pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation. METHODS: Five age groups of pediatric patients and adult patients were simulated by three organ dose estimators. Head, chest, abdomen-pelvis, and chest-abdomen-pelvis CT scans were simulated, and doses to organs both inside and outside the scan range were compared. For adults, VirtualDose was compared against ImPACT and CT-Expo. For pediatric patients, VirtualDose was compared to CT-Expo and compared to size-based methods from literature. Pediatric to adult effective dose ratios were also calculated with VirtualDose, and were compared with the ranges of effective dose ratios provided in ImPACT. RESULTS: In-field organs see less than 60% difference in dose between dose estimators. For organs outside scan range or distributed organs, a five times’ difference can occur. VirtualDose agrees with the size-based methods within 20% difference for the organs investigated. Between VirtualDose and ImPACT, the pediatric to adult ratios for effective dose are compared, and less than 21% difference is observed for chest scan while more than 40% difference is observed for head-neck scan and abdomen-pelvis scan. For pediatric patients, 2 cm scan range change can lead to a five times dose difference in partially scanned organs. CONCLUSIONS: VirtualDose is validated against CT-Expo and ImPACT with relatively small discrepancies in dose for organs inside scan range, while large discrepancies in dose are observed for organs outside scan range. Patient-specific organ dose estimation is possible using the size-based methods, and VirtualDose agrees with size-based method for the organs investigated. Careful range selection for CT protocols is necessary for organ dose optimization for pediatric and adult patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5406971
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54069712017-04-27 A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods Gao, Yiming Quinn, Brian Mahmood, Usman Long, Daniel Erdi, Yusuf St. Germain, Jean Pandit-Taskar, Neeta Xu, X. George Bolch, Wesley E. Dauer, Lawrence T. BMC Med Imaging Research Article BACKGROUND: Computed Tomography (CT) contributes up to 50% of the medical exposure to the United States population. Children are considered to be at higher risk of developing radiation-induced tumors due to the young age of exposure and increased tissue radiosensitivity. Organ dose estimation is essential for pediatric and adult patient cancer risk assessment. The objective of this study is to validate the VirtualDose software in comparison to currently available software and methods for pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation. METHODS: Five age groups of pediatric patients and adult patients were simulated by three organ dose estimators. Head, chest, abdomen-pelvis, and chest-abdomen-pelvis CT scans were simulated, and doses to organs both inside and outside the scan range were compared. For adults, VirtualDose was compared against ImPACT and CT-Expo. For pediatric patients, VirtualDose was compared to CT-Expo and compared to size-based methods from literature. Pediatric to adult effective dose ratios were also calculated with VirtualDose, and were compared with the ranges of effective dose ratios provided in ImPACT. RESULTS: In-field organs see less than 60% difference in dose between dose estimators. For organs outside scan range or distributed organs, a five times’ difference can occur. VirtualDose agrees with the size-based methods within 20% difference for the organs investigated. Between VirtualDose and ImPACT, the pediatric to adult ratios for effective dose are compared, and less than 21% difference is observed for chest scan while more than 40% difference is observed for head-neck scan and abdomen-pelvis scan. For pediatric patients, 2 cm scan range change can lead to a five times dose difference in partially scanned organs. CONCLUSIONS: VirtualDose is validated against CT-Expo and ImPACT with relatively small discrepancies in dose for organs inside scan range, while large discrepancies in dose are observed for organs outside scan range. Patient-specific organ dose estimation is possible using the size-based methods, and VirtualDose agrees with size-based method for the organs investigated. Careful range selection for CT protocols is necessary for organ dose optimization for pediatric and adult patients. BioMed Central 2017-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5406971/ /pubmed/28446130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-017-0199-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gao, Yiming
Quinn, Brian
Mahmood, Usman
Long, Daniel
Erdi, Yusuf
St. Germain, Jean
Pandit-Taskar, Neeta
Xu, X. George
Bolch, Wesley E.
Dauer, Lawrence T.
A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title_full A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title_fullStr A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title_short A comparison of pediatric and adult CT organ dose estimation methods
title_sort comparison of pediatric and adult ct organ dose estimation methods
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5406971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28446130
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-017-0199-3
work_keys_str_mv AT gaoyiming acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT quinnbrian acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT mahmoodusman acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT longdaniel acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT erdiyusuf acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT stgermainjean acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT pandittaskarneeta acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT xuxgeorge acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT bolchwesleye acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT dauerlawrencet acomparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT gaoyiming comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT quinnbrian comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT mahmoodusman comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT longdaniel comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT erdiyusuf comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT stgermainjean comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT pandittaskarneeta comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT xuxgeorge comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT bolchwesleye comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods
AT dauerlawrencet comparisonofpediatricandadultctorgandoseestimationmethods