Cargando…

Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners

This study investigates the dosimetry methodology proposed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) task group 111 and compares with the computed tomography dose index (CTDI) method and the SEDENTEXCT DI method on one clinical multislice CT and two dental cone beam CT (CBCT) scan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Celina L., Thakur, Yogesh, Ford, Nancy L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5621782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.4.3.031212
_version_ 1783267802166067200
author Li, Celina L.
Thakur, Yogesh
Ford, Nancy L.
author_facet Li, Celina L.
Thakur, Yogesh
Ford, Nancy L.
author_sort Li, Celina L.
collection PubMed
description This study investigates the dosimetry methodology proposed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) task group 111 and compares with the computed tomography dose index (CTDI) method and the SEDENTEXCT DI method on one clinical multislice CT and two dental cone beam CT (CBCT) scanners using adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms. Following the AAPM method, the normalized (100 mAs) equilibrium doses ([Formula: see text]) for Toshiba Aquilion One MSCT computed using dose measurements from the central hole of the phantom ([Formula: see text]), the peripheral hole of the phantom, ([Formula: see text]), and by the [Formula: see text] equation ([Formula: see text]) are in the range from 20 to 25 mGy. For i-CAT Next Generation dental CBCT, the normalized [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , and [Formula: see text] by the two SEDENTEXCT DI methods are in the range from 12 to 15 mGy. Fitting the AAPM equation is not possible for the limited scan lengths available on the CS 9300 dental CBCT. This study offers a simple CTDI-like measurement that can approximate the AAPM [Formula: see text] in clinical CBCT scanners capable of providing four or more scan lengths.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5621782
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56217822018-09-29 Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners Li, Celina L. Thakur, Yogesh Ford, Nancy L. J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Special Section on Visions of Safety: Perspectives on Radiation Exposure This study investigates the dosimetry methodology proposed by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) task group 111 and compares with the computed tomography dose index (CTDI) method and the SEDENTEXCT DI method on one clinical multislice CT and two dental cone beam CT (CBCT) scanners using adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms. Following the AAPM method, the normalized (100 mAs) equilibrium doses ([Formula: see text]) for Toshiba Aquilion One MSCT computed using dose measurements from the central hole of the phantom ([Formula: see text]), the peripheral hole of the phantom, ([Formula: see text]), and by the [Formula: see text] equation ([Formula: see text]) are in the range from 20 to 25 mGy. For i-CAT Next Generation dental CBCT, the normalized [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , [Formula: see text] , and [Formula: see text] by the two SEDENTEXCT DI methods are in the range from 12 to 15 mGy. Fitting the AAPM equation is not possible for the limited scan lengths available on the CS 9300 dental CBCT. This study offers a simple CTDI-like measurement that can approximate the AAPM [Formula: see text] in clinical CBCT scanners capable of providing four or more scan lengths. Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers 2017-09-29 2017-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5621782/ /pubmed/28983492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.4.3.031212 Text en © The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.
spellingShingle Special Section on Visions of Safety: Perspectives on Radiation Exposure
Li, Celina L.
Thakur, Yogesh
Ford, Nancy L.
Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title_full Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title_fullStr Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title_short Comparison of the CTDI and AAPM report No. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for MSCT and dental CBCT scanners
title_sort comparison of the ctdi and aapm report no. 111 methodology in adult, adolescent, and child head phantoms for msct and dental cbct scanners
topic Special Section on Visions of Safety: Perspectives on Radiation Exposure
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5621782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.4.3.031212
work_keys_str_mv AT licelinal comparisonofthectdiandaapmreportno111methodologyinadultadolescentandchildheadphantomsformsctanddentalcbctscanners
AT thakuryogesh comparisonofthectdiandaapmreportno111methodologyinadultadolescentandchildheadphantomsformsctanddentalcbctscanners
AT fordnancyl comparisonofthectdiandaapmreportno111methodologyinadultadolescentandchildheadphantomsformsctanddentalcbctscanners