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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |