Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of Association of Medical Physicists of India      
 Users online: 115  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
TECHNICAL NOTE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 42  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 266-272

A study to determine whether the volume-weighted computed tomography dose index gives reasonable estimates of organ doses for thai patients undergoing abdomen and pelvis computed tomography examinations


1 Department of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand
2 Department of Clinical Physics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK

Correspondence Address:
Supawitoo Sookpeng
Department of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok 65000
Thailand
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_91_17

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Values for the CTDIvol, which is displayed on scanner consoles, give doses relative to a phantom much larger than most Thai patients, and the CTDIvoldoes not take account of differences in patient size, which affect organ doses. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate relationships for size specific dose estimate (SSDE) and volume weighted computed tomography (CT) dose index (CTDIvol) with patient size for CT scanners operating under automatic tube current modulation (ATCM). Methods: Retrospective data from 244 patients who had undergone abdomen and pelvis examination on GE and Siemens CT scanners were included in this study. The combination of anteroposterior (AP) and lateral dimensions at the level of the first lumbar vertebra (L1) was used to represent patient size. Image noise within the liver was measured, and values of the absorbed dose for organs covered by the primary beam such as the liver, stomach and kidney were calculated using methods described in the literature. Values of CTDIvolwere recorded and SSDE calculated according to the American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM) Report No.204. Linear regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between SSDE, CTDIvol, image noise and patient size. Results: SSDE is 20%-50% larger than the CTDIvol, with values for larger patients being more representative. Both the CTDIvoland image noise decreased with patient size for Siemens scanners, but the decline in SSDE was less significant. For the GE scanner, the CTDIvolwas a factor of 3-4 lower in small patients compared to larger ones, while the SSDE only decreased by a factor of two. Noise actually decreased slightly with patient size. Conclusion: Values of SSDE were similar to the doses calculated for the liver, stomach and kidney, which are covered by the primary beam, confirming that it provides a good estimate of organ-absorbed dose.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed597    
    Printed15    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal