Application of OSL strips in CT dosimetry according to the AAPM methodology

Ricardo Andrade Terini; Johnatan Dias Oliveira; Elisabeth Mateus Yoshimura

doi:10.15392/2319-0612.2023.2259

Authors

Ricardo Andrade Terini Universidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Física
Johnatan Dias Oliveira Universidade Federal do ABC, Centro de Ciências Naturais e Humanas
Elisabeth Mateus Yoshimura Universidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Física

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15392/2319-0612.2023.2259

Keywords:

dose profiles, OSL strips, equilibrium doses, AAPM methodology

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) images contribute to high-quality medical diagnosis, but radiation dose can be quite high, requiring accurate assessment. CT dose index (CTDI) was developed for dosimetric purposes, but for scanners operated exclusively in axial mode. Nowadays, CTDI underestimate patient dose in helical CT exams. AAPM report TG111 (2010) suggested a new metric in which the patient's radiation dose is obtained from dose profiles constructed from several measurements made with a small ionization chamber. It is also possible to obtain dose profiles using properly calibrated OSL (optically stimulated luminescence) strips. The main objective of the present work is to contribute to optimizing CT dosimetry, comparing dose profiles obtained with OSL strips with measurements obtained by other authors. In this work, a “pencil” ionization chamber and 20 cm x 0.3 cm OSL strips were X-ray-irradiated, in air and in the holes of two cylindrical CT phantoms, using 100, 120, 140 kV peak voltages, both in lab and in a clinical CT scanner. Irradiated strips were read using an OSL reader built in the GDRFM. OSL profiles were calibrated against ionization chamber. From them, CTDI_w and CTDI_vol values were determined, differing approximately 3.9% from those of the CT scanner. From the profiles, also the planar equilibrium dose D_eq,p(TG111) was evaluated in some CT protocols; D_eq,pexceeded the CTDI values from the CT scanner in every case. E.g.: The percentage difference between D_eq,pand CTDI_vol for the head phantom ranged between 33-25%. Thus, in some cases, it could be advantageous to use calibrated OSL dosimeters instead of ionization chambers to obtain the profiles, saving time, because it is possible to obtain five OSL profiles from a single phantom irradiation.

Views: 141
PDF Downloads: 128
XML Downloads: 18

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Johnatan Dias Oliveira, Universidade Federal do ABC, Centro de Ciências Naturais e Humanas

Aluno de graduação

References

HSIEH, J.; FLOHR, T. Computed tomography recent history and future perspectives. J. Med. Imaging. v. 8:052109, 2019. Available at https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.8.5.052109. Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

BRAMBILLA, M.; VASSILEVA, J.; KUCHCINSKA, A.; REHANI, M.M. Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action. Eur. Radiol. v. 30(5): 2493-2501, 2020. Available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06528-7 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

DEMB, J.; CHU, P.; NELSON, T. et al. Optimizing radiation doses for Computed Tomography across institutions: dose auditing and best practices. JAMA Intern Med. v. 177: 810–817, 2017. Available at https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0445 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

McCOLLOUGH, CH.; LENG, S.; YU L. et al. CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology v. 259(2): 311-316, 2011. Available at https://doi.org/10.1148%2Fradiol.11101800 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

BOONE, J. M. The trouble with CTDI 100. Medical Physics v. 34(4):1364–1371, 2007. Available at https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2713240 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

PERISINAKIS, K.; DAMILAKIS, J.; TZEDAKIS, A. et al. Determination of the weighted CT dose index in modern multi-detector CT scanners. Phys. Med. Biol. 52(21): 6485–6495, 2007. Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/21/010 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE (AAPM). Comprehensive methodology for the evaluation of radiation dose in X-ray computed tomography. AAPM report n. 111. Report of AAPM Task Group 111: The future of CT dosimetry. College Park, MD: AAPM, 2010. Available at https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_111.pdf . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICISTS IN MEDICINE (AAPM). The design and use of the ICRU/AAPM CT radiation dosimetry phantom: an implementation of AAPM report 111. In: Bakalyar D.M., Angel E., Boedeker K.L., eds. The Report of AAPM Task Group 200. AAPM, 2020. Available at https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_200.pdf . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

CAMPELO M.C.S.; SILVA M.C.; TERINI R.A. CTDI versus New AAPM Metrics to assess Doses in CT: a case study. Braz. J. Rad. Sci. v. 04-02:01-15, 2016. Available at https://doi.org/10.15392/bjrs.v4i2.194 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

RUAN, C.; YUKIHARA, EG.; CLOUSE, WJ. et al. Determination of multislice computed tomography dose index (CTDI) using optically stimulated luminescence technology. Med. Phys. v. 37(7): 3560-3568, 2010. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3455285. Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

OLIVEIRA, J.D.; YOSHIMURA, E.M.; TERINI, R.A. Otimização na Avaliação de Doses em TC usando Dosímetros OSL em forma de Fita. (Optimization in Dose Assessment in CT using Tape-shaped OSL Dosimeters). Rev. Bras. Física Médica (online) v. 15, 615, 2021. Available at https://doi.org/10.29384/rbfm.2021.v15.19849001615 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.

UMISEDO N.K.; YOSHIMURA E.M. POSLI – Instrumentation for reading tape-shaped OSL detectors. Grupo de Dosimetria das Radiações e Física Médica – Instituto de Física da Universidade de São Paulo, 2013.

LI, X.; ZHANG, D.; LIU, B. Calculations of two new dose metrics proposed by AAPM Task Group 111 using the measurements with standard CT dosimetry phantoms. Med. Phys. v. 40, 081914, 2013. Available at https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4813899 . Last accessed: 15 May 2023.