No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Monte Carlo simulations of adult and pediatric computed tomography exams: Validation studies of organ doses with physical phantoms
1. J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, C. H. McCollough, J. O’Daniel, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A Monte Carlo based method to estimate radiation dose from multidetector CT (MDCT): Cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms,” Phys. Med. Biol. 50, 3989–4004 (2005).
2. J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, C. H. McCollough, M. Zankl, E. Angel, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Estimating radiation doses from multidetector CT using Monte Carlo simulations: Effects of different size voxelized patient models on magnitudes of organ and effective dose,” Phys. Med. Biol. 52, 2583–2597 (2007).
3. C. Lee, C. Lee, R. J. Staton, D. E. Hintenlang, M. M. Arreola, J. L. Williams, and W. E. Bolch, “Organ and effective doses in pediatric patients undergoing helical multislice computed tomography examination,” Med. Phys. 34, 1858–1873 (2007).
4. E. Angel, C. V. Wellnitz, M. M. Goodsitt, N. Yaghmai, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, J. W. Sayre, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, A. N. Primak, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Radiation dose to the fetus for pregnant patients undergoing multidetector CT imaging: Monte Carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size,” Radiology 249, 220–227 (2008).
5. P. Deak, M. van Straten, P. C. Shrimpton, M. Zankl, and W. A. Kalender, “Validation of a Monte Carlo tool for patient-specific dose simulations in multi-slice computed tomography,” Eur. Radiol. 18, 759–772 (2008).
6. C. Lee, D. Lodwick, J. L. Williams, and W. E. Bolch, “Hybrid computational phantoms of the 15-year male and female adolescent: Applications to CT organ dosimetry for patients of variable morphometry,” Med. Phys. 35, 2366–2382 (2008).
7. E. Angel, N. Yaghmai, C. M. Jude, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, J. G. Goldin, C. H. McCollough, A. N. Primak, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Dose to radiosensitive organs during routine chest CT: Effects of tube current modulation,” AJR, Am. J. Roentgenol. 193, 1340–1345 (2009).
8. E. Angel, N. Yaghmai, C. M. Jude, J. J. Demarco, C. H. Cagnon, J. G. Goldin, A. N. Primak, D. M. Stevens, D. D. Cody, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Monte Carlo simulations to assess the effects of tube current modulation on breast dose for multidetector CT,” Phys. Med. Biol. 54, 497–512 (2009).
9. A. C. Turner, D. Zhang, H. J. Kim, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, E. Angel, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, A. N. Primak, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A method to generate equivalent energy spectra and filtration models based on measurement for multidetector CT Monte Carlo dosimetry simulations,” Med. Phys. 36, 2154–2164 (2009).
10. H. Liu, J. Gu, P. F. Caracappa, and X. G. Xu, “Comparison of two types of adult phantoms in terms of organ doses from diagnostic CT procedures,” Phys. Med. Biol. 55, 1441–1451 (2010).
11. X. Li, E. Samei, W. P. Segars, G. M. Sturgeon, J. G. Colsher, G. Toncheva, T. T. Yoshizumi, and D. P. Frush, “Patient-specific radiation dose and cancer risk estimation in CT: Part I. Development and validation of a Monte Carlo program,” Med. Phys. 38, 397–407 (2011).
12. C. Lee, K. P. Kim, D. Long, D. Fisher, C. Tien, S. L. Simon, A. Bouville, and W. E. Bolch, “Organ doses for reference adult male and female undergoing computed tomography estimates by Monte Carlo simulations,” Med. Phys. 38, 1196–1206 (2011).
13. D. B. Pelowitz, “MCNPX user's manual version 2.6.0,” Los Alamos National Laboratory Report No. LA-CP-05-0369 (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, 2008).
14. K. Cranley, B. J. Gilmore, G. W. A. Fogarty, and L. Desponds, “Catalogue of diagnostic x-ray spectra and other data,” Report No. 78 (The Institute of Physics, London, 1997).
15. R. J. Staton, C. Lee, C. Lee, M. D. Williams, D. E. Hintenlang, M. M. Arreola, J. L. Williams, and W. E. Bolch, “Organ and effective doses in newborn patients during helical multislice computed tomography examination,” Phys. Med. Biol. 51, 5151–5166 (2006).
16. D. E. Hyer, R. F. Fisher, and D. E. Hintenlang, “Characterization of a water-equivalent fiber-optic coupled dosimeter for use in diagnostic radiology,” Med. Phys. 36, 1711–1716 (2009).
17. J. F. Winslow, D. E. Hyer, R. F. Fisher, C. J. Tien, and D. E. Hintenlang, “Construction of anthropomorphic phantoms for use in dosimetry studies,” J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 10, 195–204 (2009).
18. J. L. Hurtado, C. Lee, D. Lodwick, T. Goede, J. L. Williams, and W. E. Bolch, “Hybrid computational phantoms representing the reference adult male and adult female: Construction and applications for retrospective dosimetry,” Health Phys. 102, 292–304 (2012).
19. C. Lee, D. Lodwick, J. Hurtado, D. Pafundi, J. L. Williams, and W. E. Bolch, “The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry,” Phys. Med. Biol. 55, 339–363 (2010).
21. A. K. Jones, D. E. Hintenlang, and W. E. Bolch, “Tissue-equivalent materials for construction of tomographic dosimetry phantoms in pediatric radiology,” Med. Phys. 30, 2072–2081 (2003).
22.International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, “Photon, electron, proton and neutron interaction data for body tissues,” ICRU Report No. 46 (ICRU Publications, Bethesda, MD, 1992).
24. J. Zhang, Y. H. Na, P. F. Caracappa, and X. G. Xu, “RPI-AM and RPI-AF, a pair of mesh-based, size-adjustable adult male and female computational phantoms using ICRP-89 parameters and their calculations for organ doses from monoenergetic photon beams,” Phys. Med. Biol. 54, 5885–5908 (2009).
25. J. H. Siewerdsen, A. M. Waese, D. J. Moseley, S. Richard, and D. A. Jaffray, “Spektr: A computational tool for x-ray spectral analysis and imaging system optimization,” Med. Phys. 31, 3057–3067 (2004).
Article metrics loading...
To validate the accuracy of a Monte Carlo source model of the Siemens SOMATOM Sensation 16 CT scanner using organ doses measured in physical anthropomorphic phantoms.
The x-ray output of the Siemens SOMATOM Sensation 16 multidetector CT scanner was simulated within the Monte Carlo radiation transport code, MCNPX version 2.6. The resulting source model was able to perform various simulated axial and helical computed tomographic (CT) scans of varying scan parameters, including beam energy, filtration, pitch, and beam collimation. Two custom-built anthropomorphic phantoms were used to take dose measurements on the CT scanner: an adult male and a 9-month-old. The adult male is a physical replica of the University of Florida reference adult male hybrid computational phantom, while the 9-month-old is a replica of the University of Florida Series B 9-month-old voxel computational phantom. Each phantom underwent a series of axial and helical CT scans, during which organ doses were measured using fiber-optic coupled plastic scintillator dosimeters developed at the University of Florida. The physical setup was reproduced and simulated in MCNPX using the CT source model and the computational phantoms upon which the anthropomorphic phantoms were constructed. Average organ doses were then calculated based upon these MCNPX results.
For all CT scans, good agreement was seen between measured and simulated organ doses. For the adult male, the percent differences were within 16% for axial scans, and within 18% for helical scans. For the 9-month-old, the percent differences were all within 15% for both the axial and helical scans. These results are comparable to previously published validation studies using GE scanners and commercially available anthropomorphic phantoms.
Overall results of this study show that the Monte Carlo source model can be used to accurately and reliably calculate organ doses for patients undergoing a variety of axial or helical CT examinations on the Siemens SOMATOM Sensation 16 scanner.
Full text loading...
Most read this month