Cargando…

0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography

INTRODUCTION: Patient positioning is an essential consideration for the optimisation of radiation dose during CT examinations. The study objectives seek to explore the effects of vertical off‐centring, localiser direction (0° and 180°), and phantom positioning (supine and prone) on radiation dose, u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Al‐Hayek, Yazan, Zheng, Xiaoming, Davidson, Rob, Hayre, Christopher, Al‐Mousa, Dana, Finlay, Campbell, Spuur, Kelly
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8892417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34402591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.535
_version_ 1784662162811125760
author Al‐Hayek, Yazan
Zheng, Xiaoming
Davidson, Rob
Hayre, Christopher
Al‐Mousa, Dana
Finlay, Campbell
Spuur, Kelly
author_facet Al‐Hayek, Yazan
Zheng, Xiaoming
Davidson, Rob
Hayre, Christopher
Al‐Mousa, Dana
Finlay, Campbell
Spuur, Kelly
author_sort Al‐Hayek, Yazan
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Patient positioning is an essential consideration for the optimisation of radiation dose during CT examinations. The study objectives seek to explore the effects of vertical off‐centring, localiser direction (0° and 180°), and phantom positioning (supine and prone) on radiation dose, using three different tube voltages in multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) imaging. METHODS: The trunk of a PBU‐60 anthropomorphic phantom was imaged using a Discovery CT750 HD – 128 slice (GE Healthcare). Images employing 0° and 180° localisers were acquired in supine and prone orientation for each combination of vertical off‐centring (±100, ±60 and ±30 mm) and different tube voltages (80, 120 and 140 kVp), using the system’s automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) function. The displayed volume CT dose index (CTDI(vol)) and dose length product (DLP) were recorded. RESULTS: With incremental table off‐centring of ±100 mm, the dose at 120 kVp in the supine position ranged from 63% to 196% (0° localiser) and from 66% to 191% (180° localiser) as compared to iso‐centre. While in the prone position, the dose ranged from 62% to 195% (0° localiser); and 62% to 193% (180° localiser), with a notable dose increase at higher tube voltages. Dose variation and vertical off‐centring showed a significant relationship for both 0° and 180° localisers (r = 0.94 and 0.96, respectively, P < 0.001). The CTDI(vol) variation between supine and prone phantom positions at ±100 mm off‐centring was 0.22 mGy (2.9%), and 0.19 mGy (2.3%) when the 0° and 180 ° localisers were utilised, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Phantom off‐centring and localiser direction evidenced large dose variation. It is recommended that the 0° localiser is employed during CT examinations, in order to minimise the potential additional radiation dose which may result from off‐centring and the use of lower tube voltages where clinically appropriate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8892417
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88924172022-03-10 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography Al‐Hayek, Yazan Zheng, Xiaoming Davidson, Rob Hayre, Christopher Al‐Mousa, Dana Finlay, Campbell Spuur, Kelly J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Patient positioning is an essential consideration for the optimisation of radiation dose during CT examinations. The study objectives seek to explore the effects of vertical off‐centring, localiser direction (0° and 180°), and phantom positioning (supine and prone) on radiation dose, using three different tube voltages in multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) imaging. METHODS: The trunk of a PBU‐60 anthropomorphic phantom was imaged using a Discovery CT750 HD – 128 slice (GE Healthcare). Images employing 0° and 180° localisers were acquired in supine and prone orientation for each combination of vertical off‐centring (±100, ±60 and ±30 mm) and different tube voltages (80, 120 and 140 kVp), using the system’s automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) function. The displayed volume CT dose index (CTDI(vol)) and dose length product (DLP) were recorded. RESULTS: With incremental table off‐centring of ±100 mm, the dose at 120 kVp in the supine position ranged from 63% to 196% (0° localiser) and from 66% to 191% (180° localiser) as compared to iso‐centre. While in the prone position, the dose ranged from 62% to 195% (0° localiser); and 62% to 193% (180° localiser), with a notable dose increase at higher tube voltages. Dose variation and vertical off‐centring showed a significant relationship for both 0° and 180° localisers (r = 0.94 and 0.96, respectively, P < 0.001). The CTDI(vol) variation between supine and prone phantom positions at ±100 mm off‐centring was 0.22 mGy (2.9%), and 0.19 mGy (2.3%) when the 0° and 180 ° localisers were utilised, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Phantom off‐centring and localiser direction evidenced large dose variation. It is recommended that the 0° localiser is employed during CT examinations, in order to minimise the potential additional radiation dose which may result from off‐centring and the use of lower tube voltages where clinically appropriate. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-17 2022-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8892417/ /pubmed/34402591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.535 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Al‐Hayek, Yazan
Zheng, Xiaoming
Davidson, Rob
Hayre, Christopher
Al‐Mousa, Dana
Finlay, Campbell
Spuur, Kelly
0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title_full 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title_fullStr 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title_full_unstemmed 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title_short 0° vs. 180° CT localiser: The effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
title_sort 0° vs. 180° ct localiser: the effect of vertical off‐centring, phantom positioning and tube voltage on dose optimisation in multidetector computed tomography
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8892417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34402591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.535
work_keys_str_mv AT alhayekyazan 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT zhengxiaoming 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT davidsonrob 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT hayrechristopher 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT almousadana 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT finlaycampbell 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography
AT spuurkelly 0vs180ctlocalisertheeffectofverticaloffcentringphantompositioningandtubevoltageondoseoptimisationinmultidetectorcomputedtomography