Osteoporosis International

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 263–269 | Cite as

Total dose incurred by patients and staff from BMD measurement using a new 2D digital bone densitometer

  • V. Boudousq
  • P. O. Kotzki
  • J. M. Dinten
  • C. Barrau
  • C. Robert-Coutant
  • E. Thomas
  • D. Mariano Goulart
Original Article


Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a widely used and precise technique for non-invasive assessment of bone mineral density. The DXA systems have evolved from pencil X-ray beam (single detector) to fan beam (linear array detector) and recently cone beam densitometers (bi-dimensional detector), allowing for an examination to occur without any scanning and with a short acquisition time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient and staff dose from a new cone beam densitometer, the DMS Lexxos. Measurements were performed on a DMS Lexxos bone densitometer prototype. An anthropomorphic phantom and thermoluminescent dosimeters were used to evaluate the effective dose. Ionization chambers and electronic personal dosimeters were used to evaluate the staff dose. The effective dose is 8.4 µSv for an anteroposterior spine examination and 4.8 µSv for a femoral neck in standard mode. The averaged scattered dose rate (ambient dose equivalent) at 1 m from the beam is evaluated at 226 µSv/h. Assuming six patients per hour with two views per patient, the time averaged dose rate is evaluated at 2.9 µSv/h. By the personal dosimeter, the staff dose (Hp 10) at 1 m from the beam is evaluated at 0.23 µSv per examination. For one examination, patient and staff dose from this new technology remains low: in the same range as the fan-beam densitometer.


Cone beam Dosimetry DXA Effective dose 


Acknowledgements. We are grateful to N. Johnson, R. Grando, M. Agnel, and M. Fourcade for excellent technical assistance.


  1. 1.
    ICRP Publication 60 (1990) Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 21:11–21Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Njeh CF, Fuerst T, Hans D, Blake GM, Genant HK (1999) Radiation exposure in bone mineral density assessment. Appl Radiat Isot 50:215–236Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dinten JM, Robert-Coutant C, Darboux M (2001) Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry using a 2D digital radiography detector. Application to bone densitometry. Proc SPIE 4320:459–468Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Volle JM, Dinten JM (1998) Physical model based restoration of mammographies. Proc SPIE 3336:641–650Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ICRP Publication 23 (1975) Report of the task group on reference man. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wall BF, Harrisson RM, Spiers FW (1988) Patient dosimetry techniques in diagnostic radiology. The Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine. Report 53, IPSN, YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shrimpton PC, Wall BF, Fisher ES (1981) The tissue-equivalence of the Aldo Rando anthropomorphic phantom for X-rays of diagnostic qualities. Phys Med Biol 26:133–139Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huda W, Sandison GA (1984) Estimation of mean organ doses in diagnostic radiology from Rando phantom measurements. Health Phys 47:463–467Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Golikov VY, Nikitin VV (1989) Estimation of the mean organ doses and the effective dose equivalent from Rando Phantom measurements. Health Phys 56:111–115Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and measurements) report 47 (1992) Measurements of dose equivalents from external photons and electron beams. ICRU, Bethesda, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and measurements) report 51 (1993) Quantities and units in radiation protecton dosimetry. ICRU, Bethesda, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and measurements) report 57 (1998) Conversion coefficients for use in radiological Protection against external radiation. ICRU, Bethesda, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patel R, Lewis MK, Blake GM, Batchelor S, Potts E, Smith IG, Fogelman I (1996) New generation DXA scanners increase dose to patients and staff. In: Current research in osteoporosis and bone mineral measurement, vol 4. British Institute of Radiology, London, p 99Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Starritt HC, Elvins DM, Ring FJ (1996) Radiation dose and the Hologic Acclaim X-ray bone densitometer. In: Current research in osteoporosis and bone mineral measurement, vol 4. British Institute of Radiology, London, pp 99–100Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Njeh CF, Apple K, Temperton DH, Boivin CM (1996) Radiological assessment of a new bone densitometer—the Lunar Expert. Br J Radiol 69:335–340Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steel SA, Bakert AJ, Saunderson JR (1998) An assessment of the radiation dose to patients and staff from a Lunar Expert-XL fan beam densitometer. Physiol Meas 19:17–26Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stewart SP, Milner D, Moore AC, Emery P et al. (1996) Preliminary report on the Lunar Expert-XL imaging densitometer: dosimetry, precision and cross calibration. In: Current research in osteoporosis and bone mineral measurement, vol 4. British Institute of Radiology, London, pp 101–102Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewis MK, Blake GM, Fogelman I (1994) Patient dose in dual X-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporos Int 4:11–15Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mazess RB, Hanson R, Payne R, Nord R, Wilson M (2000) Axial and total-body bone densitometry using a narrow-angle fan beam. Osteoporos Int 11:158–166Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Patel R, Blake GM, Batchelor S, Fogelman I (1996) Occupational dose to the radiographer in dual X-ray absorptiometry: a comparison of pencil-beam and fan-beam systems. Br J Radiol 69:539–543Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Directive96/29/EURATOM du conseil du 13/05/96. Journal officiel des communautés européennes 29/06/96 FR, L159:1–18Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Boudousq
    • 1
  • P. O. Kotzki
    • 1
  • J. M. Dinten
    • 2
  • C. Barrau
    • 1
  • C. Robert-Coutant
    • 2
  • E. Thomas
    • 1
  • D. Mariano Goulart
    • 1
  1. 1.Service de Médecine Nucléaire et de BiophysiqueCHU Nîmes, Hôpital Carémeau,NîmesFrance
  2. 2.LETI-CEA-Direction de la recherche technologique, Département des systèmes pour l'information et la santé,,CEA-GrenobleGrenoble Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations