Comparison of patient doses at different CT scanners with same acquisition protocol

被引:0
|
作者
Balkay, L. [1 ]
Oszlanski, A. [1 ]
Krizsan, A. K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Debrecen, Inst Nucl Med, H-4012 Debrecen, Hungary
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
In the last decade both the number of powerful CT scanners and the number of patient investigations increased with a consequent increase of the patient radiation dose. There are large dose variations (more than 10 fold) among individual CT centers and it remains true if they include the same model of CT scanners. The aim of this study was to compare the patient effective dose (D-e) during the CT examinations from different manufacturer models presuming the same acquisition protocol and using the imPACT patient organ and effective dose calculator program. The following manufacturers and models were selected in the program: GE (LightSpeed Ultra, LightSpeed 16, LightSpeed Pro 16, LightSpeed VCT), Philips (Brilliance 16, Brilliance 16 Power, Big Bore, Brilliance 64/40) and the Siemens (Emotion 6, Sensation 16, Sensation 16 Straton, Sensation 64, Definition AS). Head and body scans were defined for all cases altering tube voltages, while dose calculations were normalized to 100 mAs X-ray exposure. It was found that in body investigations the calculated D-e for the GE scans were higher by 20% comparing to Siemens and Philips related values. For the head examinations the differences were larger by almost 55%. We also demonstrated that a power relationship can be found between the De and the tube voltage with the exponent of 3.02+/-0.14 kV-1 and 2.68+/-0.14 kV-1 for the body and the head scans respectively. It can be concluded that the patient effective dose could be different in CT examinations using distinct CT scanners but defining the same acquisition protocol. Considering the patient dose, this also means that the scan protocols cannot be transferred between different models without specific investigation.
引用
收藏
页码:3644 / 3645
页数:2
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Automatic Parameter Extraction from Scanners to Wiki for CT Protocol Management
    Qin, L.
    McCall, K.
    Dipiro, P.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)
  • [42] Automatic Exposure Control systems and current modulations: comparison of different 64-slice CT scanners
    Colli, V.
    Strocchi, S.
    Vite, C.
    Cacciatori, M.
    Rizzi, E.
    Conte, L.
    WORLD CONGRESS ON MEDICAL PHYSICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, VOL 25, PT 2 - DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, 2009, 25 : 189 - 192
  • [43] Quantification of bone microarchitecture using photon-counting CT at different radiation doses: A comparison with μCT
    Kok, Joeri
    Bevers, Melissa S. A. M.
    van Rietbergen, Bert
    Oei, Edwin H. G.
    Booij, Ronald
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2024, 181
  • [44] Efficient acquisition protocol for cardiac dynamic CT
    Roux, S
    Desbat, L
    Koenig, A
    Grangeat, P
    2002 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM, CONFERENCE RECORD, VOLS 1-3, 2003, : 1612 - 1616
  • [45] COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT BOLUS DOSES OF MORPHINE FOR PATIENT-CONTROLLED ANALGESIA IN CHILDREN
    DOYLE, E
    MOTTART, KJ
    MARSHALL, C
    MORTON, NS
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1994, 72 (02) : 160 - 163
  • [46] Comparison of different quantitative data acquisition methods for the bony knee joint within the same sample
    Meyer, Sabrina
    Gascho, Dominic
    Boeni, Thomas
    Ruehli, Frank
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, 2016, 159 : 228 - 228
  • [47] Patient Dose in CT: Calculating Patient Specific Doses in CT(Joint with Education)
    McNitt-Gray, M.
    Xu, X.
    Samei, E.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06)
  • [48] Adaptive Acquisition Protocol Design for Local CNR Maximization in Flexible SPECT and PET Scanners
    Asma, Evren
    Manjeshwar, Ravindra M.
    2010 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM CONFERENCE RECORD (NSS/MIC), 2010, : 3032 - 3037
  • [49] Validation of the Implementation of Different CT Scanners in Proton Treatment Planning
    Fuentes, C. Llina
    Geismer, D.
    Christiaens, M.
    Vermeren, X.
    Ding, X.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3226 - 3226
  • [50] Transportable versus fixed platform CT scanners: Comparison of costs
    Mayo-Smith, WW
    Rhea, JT
    Smith, WJ
    Cobb, CM
    Gareen, IF
    Dorfman, GS
    RADIOLOGY, 2003, 226 (01) : 63 - 68