Abstract
Entrance surface dose (ESD) measurements are important in X-ray computed tomography (CT) for examination, but in clinical settings it is difficult to measure ESDs because of a lack of suitable dosimeters. We focus on the capability of a small optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter. The aim of this study is to propose a practical method for using an OSL dosimeter to measure the ESD when performing a CT examination. The small OSL dosimeter has an outer width of 10 mm; it is assumed that a partial dose may be measured because the slice thickness and helical pitch can be set to various values. To verify our method, we used a CT scanner having 320 rows of detectors and checked the consistencies of the ESDs measured using OSL dosimeters by comparing them with those measured using Gafchromic™ films. The films were calibrated using an ionization chamber on the basis of half-value layer estimation. On the other hand, the OSL dosimeter was appropriately calibrated using a practical calibration curve previously proposed by our group. The ESDs measured using the OSL dosimeters were in good agreement with the reference ESDs from the Gafchromic™ films. Using these data, we also estimated the uncertainty of ESDs measured with small OSL dosimeters. We concluded that a small OSL dosimeter can be considered suitable for measuring the ESD with an uncertainty of 30 % during CT examinations in which pitch factors below 1.000 are applied.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gonalez AB, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-ray: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet. 2004;363:345–51. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15433-0.
Uffmann M, Schaefer-Prokop C. Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72:202–8. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.060.
Gardner SJ, Studenski MT, Giaddui T, et al. Investigation into image quality and dose for different patient geometries with multiple cone-beam CT systems. Med Phys. 2014;41(3):031908. doi:10.1118/1.4865788.
Goldman LW. Principles of CT: radiation dose and image quality. J Nucl Med Thecnol. 2007;35(4):213–25. doi:10.2967/jnmt.106.037846.
Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z, et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ. 2013;346:f2360. doi:10.1136/bmj.f2360.
McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, et al. CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiol. 2011;259:311–6. doi:10.1148/radiol.11101800.
Koyama S, Aoyama T, Oda N, et al. Radiation dose evaluation in tomosynthesis and C-arm cone-beam CT examinations with an anthropomorphic phantom. Med Phys. 2010;. doi:10.1118/1.3465045.
McDermott A, White RA, Mc-Nitt-Gray M, et al. Pediatric organ dose measurements in axial and helical multislice CT. Med Phys. 2009;36(5):1494–9. doi:10.1118/1.3101817.
Tsalatoutas IA, Epistatou A, Nikoletopoulos S, et al. Measuring skin dose in CT examinations under complex geometries: instruments, methods and considerations. Physica Med. 2015;31:1005–14. doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.08.001.
Tappouni R, Mathers B. Scan quality and entrance skin dose in thoracic CT: a comparison between bismuth breast shield and posteriorly centered partial CT scans. ISRN Radiol. 2013;. doi:10.5402/2013/457396 (article ID 457396).
Duan X, Wang J, Christner JA, et al. Dose reduction to anterior surfaces with organ-based tube-current modulation: evaluation of performance in a phantom study. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:689–95. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.6061.
Tominaga M, Kawata Y, Niki N, et al. Measurements of multidetector CT surface dose distributions using a film dosimeter and chest phantom. Med Phys. 2011;38:2467. doi:10.1118/1.3570769.
Westra SJ, Li X, Gulati K, et al. Entrance skin dosimetry and size-specific dose estimate from pediatric chest CTA. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014;8:97–107. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2013.08.002.
Ramac JP, Knezevic Z, Hebrang A, et al. Radiation dose reduction by using low dose CT protocol of thorax. Radiat Meas. 2013;55:46–50. doi:10.1016/j.radmeas.2012.07.012.
Cordasco C, Portelli M, Militi A, et al. Low-dose protocol of the spiral CT in orthodontics: comparative evaluation of entrance skin dose with traditional X-ray techniques. Prog Orthod. 2013;14:24. doi:10.1186/2196-1042-14-24.
Takegami K, Hayashi H, Okino H, et al. Estimation of identification limit for a small-type OSL dosimeter on the medical images by measurement of X-ray spectra. Radiol Phys Technol. 2016;. doi:10.1007/s12194-016-0362-5 (in press).
Takegami K, Hayashi H, Nakagawa K, et al. Measurement method of an exposed dose using the nanoDot dosimeter. Eur Con Radiol (EPOS). 2015;. doi:10.1594/ecr2015/C-0218.
Hayashi H, Nakagawa K, Okino H, et al. High accuracy measurements by consecutive readings of OSL dosimeter. Med Imaging Inf Sci. 2014;31(2):28–34. doi:10.11318/mii.31.28.
Nakagawa K, Hayashi H, Takegami K, et al. Fabrication of annealing equipment for optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter. Jpn J Radiol Technol. 2014;70(10):1135–42. doi:10.6009/jjrt.2014_JSRT_70.10.1135.
Hayashi H, Takegami K, Okino H, et al. Procedure to measure angular dependences of personal dosimeters by means of diagnostic X-ray equipment. Med Imaging Inf Sci. 2015;32(1):8–14. doi:10.11318/mii.32.8.
Takegami K, Hayashi H, Okino H, et al. Energy dependence measurement of small-type optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter by means of characteristic X-rays induced with general diagnostic X-ray equipment. Radiol Phys Technol. 2016;9:99–108. doi:10.1007/s12194-015-0339-9.
Takegami K, Hayashi H, Okino H, et al. Practical calibration curve of small-type optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter for evaluation of entrance-skin dose in the diagnostic X-ray. Radiol Phys Technol. 2015;8:286–94. doi:10.1007/s12194-015-0318-1.
Giaddui T, Cui Y, Galvin J, et al. Comparative dose evaluations between XVI and OBI cone beam CT systems using Gafchromic™ XRQA2 films and nanoDot optical stimulated luminescence dosimeters. Med Phys. 2013;40:062102. doi:10.1118/1.4803466.
Tomic N, Devic S, DeBlois F, et al. Reference radiochromic film dosimetry in kilovoltage photon beams during CBCT image acquisition. Med Phys. 1083;2010:37. doi:10.1118/1.3302140.
Yamashiro T, Miyara T, Honda O, et al. Adaptive iterative dose reduction Using three dimensional processing (AIDR 3D) improves chest CT image quality and reduces radiation exposure. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e105735. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105735.
Yamada Y, Jinzaki M, Hosokawa T, et al. Dose reduction in chest CT: comparison of the adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D, adaptive iterative dose reduction, and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:4185–95. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.07.013.
D’Alessio D, Giliberti C, Soriani A, et al. Dose evaluation for skin and organ in hepatocellular carcinoma during angiographic procedure. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2013;32:81. doi:10.1186/1756-9966-32-81.
Sabarudin A, Sun Z. Radiation dose measurement in coronary CT angiography. World J Cardiol. 2013;5(12):459–64. doi:10.4330/wjc.v5.i12.459.
Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Estimating effective dose for CT using dose-length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting international commission on radiological protection publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. Am J Rentgenol. 2010;194:881–9. doi:10.2214/AJR.09.3462.
Hubbell JH. Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorption coefficients. Int J Appl Radiat Isotopes. 1982;33(11):1269–90. doi:10.1016/0020-708X(82)90248-4.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 15K19205.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
T Okazaki, T. Hashizume, and I. Kobayashi are employees of Nagase Landauer Ltd. and collaborating researchers.
About this article
Cite this article
Takegami, K., Hayashi, H., Yamada, K. et al. Entrance surface dose measurements using a small OSL dosimeter with a computed tomography scanner having 320 rows of detectors. Radiol Phys Technol 10, 49–59 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-016-0366-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-016-0366-1