Cargando…

The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies

BACKGROUND: To investigate the feasibility of using dual-energy CT (DECT) for tissue segmentation and kilovolt (kV) dose calculations in pre-clinical studies and assess potential dose calculation accuracy gain. METHODS: Two phantoms and an ex-vivo mouse were scanned in a small animal irradiator with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vaniqui, Ana, Schyns, Lotte E. J. R., Almeida, Isabel P., van der Heyden, Brent, van Hoof, Stefan J., Verhaegen, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5696722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29157265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0922-9
_version_ 1783280504353587200
author Vaniqui, Ana
Schyns, Lotte E. J. R.
Almeida, Isabel P.
van der Heyden, Brent
van Hoof, Stefan J.
Verhaegen, Frank
author_facet Vaniqui, Ana
Schyns, Lotte E. J. R.
Almeida, Isabel P.
van der Heyden, Brent
van Hoof, Stefan J.
Verhaegen, Frank
author_sort Vaniqui, Ana
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To investigate the feasibility of using dual-energy CT (DECT) for tissue segmentation and kilovolt (kV) dose calculations in pre-clinical studies and assess potential dose calculation accuracy gain. METHODS: Two phantoms and an ex-vivo mouse were scanned in a small animal irradiator with two distinct energies. Tissue segmentation was performed with the single-energy CT (SECT) and DECT methods. A number of different material maps was used. Dose calculations were performed to verify the impact of segmentations on the dose accuracy. RESULTS: DECT showed better overall results in comparison to SECT. Higher number of DECT segmentation media resulted in smaller dose differences in comparison to the reference. Increasing the number of materials in the SECT method yielded more instability. Both modalities showed a limit to which adding more materials with similar characteristics ceased providing better segmentation results, and resulted in more noise in the material maps and the dose distributions. The effect was aggravated with a decrease in beam energy. For the ex-vivo specimen, the choice of only one high dense bone for the SECT method resulted in large volumes of tissue receiving high doses. For the DECT method, the choice of more than one kind of bone resulted in lower dose values for the different tissues occupying the same volume. For the organs at risk surrounded by bone, the doses were lower when using the SECT method in comparison to DECT, due to the high absorption of the bone. SECT material segmentation may lead to an underestimation of the dose to OAR in the proximity of bone. CONCLUSIONS: The DECT method enabled the selection of a higher number of materials thereby increasing the accuracy in dose calculations. In phantom studies, SECT performed best with three materials and DECT with seven for the phantom case. For irradiations in preclinical studies with kV photon energies, the use of DECT segmentation combined with the choice of a low-density bone is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5696722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56967222017-12-01 The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies Vaniqui, Ana Schyns, Lotte E. J. R. Almeida, Isabel P. van der Heyden, Brent van Hoof, Stefan J. Verhaegen, Frank Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To investigate the feasibility of using dual-energy CT (DECT) for tissue segmentation and kilovolt (kV) dose calculations in pre-clinical studies and assess potential dose calculation accuracy gain. METHODS: Two phantoms and an ex-vivo mouse were scanned in a small animal irradiator with two distinct energies. Tissue segmentation was performed with the single-energy CT (SECT) and DECT methods. A number of different material maps was used. Dose calculations were performed to verify the impact of segmentations on the dose accuracy. RESULTS: DECT showed better overall results in comparison to SECT. Higher number of DECT segmentation media resulted in smaller dose differences in comparison to the reference. Increasing the number of materials in the SECT method yielded more instability. Both modalities showed a limit to which adding more materials with similar characteristics ceased providing better segmentation results, and resulted in more noise in the material maps and the dose distributions. The effect was aggravated with a decrease in beam energy. For the ex-vivo specimen, the choice of only one high dense bone for the SECT method resulted in large volumes of tissue receiving high doses. For the DECT method, the choice of more than one kind of bone resulted in lower dose values for the different tissues occupying the same volume. For the organs at risk surrounded by bone, the doses were lower when using the SECT method in comparison to DECT, due to the high absorption of the bone. SECT material segmentation may lead to an underestimation of the dose to OAR in the proximity of bone. CONCLUSIONS: The DECT method enabled the selection of a higher number of materials thereby increasing the accuracy in dose calculations. In phantom studies, SECT performed best with three materials and DECT with seven for the phantom case. For irradiations in preclinical studies with kV photon energies, the use of DECT segmentation combined with the choice of a low-density bone is recommended. BioMed Central 2017-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5696722/ /pubmed/29157265 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0922-9 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
Vaniqui, Ana
Schyns, Lotte E. J. R.
Almeida, Isabel P.
van der Heyden, Brent
van Hoof, Stefan J.
Verhaegen, Frank
The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title_full The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title_fullStr The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title_full_unstemmed The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title_short The impact of dual energy CT imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
title_sort impact of dual energy ct imaging on dose calculations for pre-clinical studies
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5696722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29157265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-017-0922-9
work_keys_str_mv AT vaniquiana theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT schynslotteejr theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT almeidaisabelp theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT vanderheydenbrent theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT vanhoofstefanj theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT verhaegenfrank theimpactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT vaniquiana impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT schynslotteejr impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT almeidaisabelp impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT vanderheydenbrent impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT vanhoofstefanj impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies
AT verhaegenfrank impactofdualenergyctimagingondosecalculationsforpreclinicalstudies