Technical Note: Precision and accuracy of a commercially available CT optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for the measurement of CT dose index

Thomas J. Vrieze, Glenn M. Sturchio, Cynthia H McCollough

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the precision and accuracy of CTDI100 measurements made using commercially available optically stimulated luminescent (OSL) dosimeters (Landaur, Inc.) as beam width, tube potential, and attenuating material were varied. Methods: One hundred forty OSL dosimeters were individually exposed to a single axial CT scan, either in air, a 16-cm (head), or 32-cm (body) CTDI phantom at both center and peripheral positions. Scans were performed using nominal total beam widths of 3.6, 6, 19.2, and 28.8 mm at 120 kV and 28.8 mm at 80 kV. Five measurements were made for each of 28 parameter combinations. Measurements were made under the same conditions using a 100-mm long CTDI ion chamber. Exposed OSL dosimeters were returned to the manufacturer, who reported dose to air (in mGy) as a function of distance along the probe, integrated dose, and CTDI100. Results: The mean precision averaged over 28 datasets containing five measurements each was 1.4 ± 0.6, range 0.6-2.7 for OSL and 0.08 ± 0.06, range 0.02-0.3 for ion chamber. The root mean square (RMS) percent differences between OSL and ion chamber CTDI 100 values were 13.8, 6.4, and 8.7 for in-Air, head, and body measurements, respectively, with an overall RMS percent difference of 10.1. OSL underestimated CTDI100 relative to the ion chamber 2128 times (75). After manual correction of the 80 kV measurements, the RMS percent differences between OSL and ion chamber measurements were 9.9 and 10.0 for 80 and 120 kV, respectively. Conclusions: Measurements of CTDI100 with commercially available CT OSL dosimeters had a percent standard deviation of 1.4. After energy-dependent correction factors were applied, the RMS percent difference in the measured CTDI100 values was about 10, with a tendency of OSL to underestimate CTDI relative to the ion chamber. Unlike ion chamber methods, however, OSL dosimeters allow measurement of the radiation dose profile.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)6580-6584
Number of pages5
JournalMedical Physics
Volume39
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2012

Fingerprint

Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimetry
Ions
Air
Head
Radiation Dosimeters
Radiation

Keywords

  • computed tomography (CT)
  • CT dose index
  • optically stimulated luminescence
  • radiation dose profile
  • radiation dosimetry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Technical Note : Precision and accuracy of a commercially available CT optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for the measurement of CT dose index. / Vrieze, Thomas J.; Sturchio, Glenn M.; McCollough, Cynthia H.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 39, No. 11, 11.2012, p. 6580-6584.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{18f2781da87143ef9389eeddf4b72a1b,
title = "Technical Note: Precision and accuracy of a commercially available CT optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for the measurement of CT dose index",
abstract = "Purpose: To determine the precision and accuracy of CTDI100 measurements made using commercially available optically stimulated luminescent (OSL) dosimeters (Landaur, Inc.) as beam width, tube potential, and attenuating material were varied. Methods: One hundred forty OSL dosimeters were individually exposed to a single axial CT scan, either in air, a 16-cm (head), or 32-cm (body) CTDI phantom at both center and peripheral positions. Scans were performed using nominal total beam widths of 3.6, 6, 19.2, and 28.8 mm at 120 kV and 28.8 mm at 80 kV. Five measurements were made for each of 28 parameter combinations. Measurements were made under the same conditions using a 100-mm long CTDI ion chamber. Exposed OSL dosimeters were returned to the manufacturer, who reported dose to air (in mGy) as a function of distance along the probe, integrated dose, and CTDI100. Results: The mean precision averaged over 28 datasets containing five measurements each was 1.4 ± 0.6, range 0.6-2.7 for OSL and 0.08 ± 0.06, range 0.02-0.3 for ion chamber. The root mean square (RMS) percent differences between OSL and ion chamber CTDI 100 values were 13.8, 6.4, and 8.7 for in-Air, head, and body measurements, respectively, with an overall RMS percent difference of 10.1. OSL underestimated CTDI100 relative to the ion chamber 2128 times (75). After manual correction of the 80 kV measurements, the RMS percent differences between OSL and ion chamber measurements were 9.9 and 10.0 for 80 and 120 kV, respectively. Conclusions: Measurements of CTDI100 with commercially available CT OSL dosimeters had a percent standard deviation of 1.4. After energy-dependent correction factors were applied, the RMS percent difference in the measured CTDI100 values was about 10, with a tendency of OSL to underestimate CTDI relative to the ion chamber. Unlike ion chamber methods, however, OSL dosimeters allow measurement of the radiation dose profile.",
keywords = "computed tomography (CT), CT dose index, optically stimulated luminescence, radiation dose profile, radiation dosimetry",
author = "Vrieze, {Thomas J.} and Sturchio, {Glenn M.} and McCollough, {Cynthia H}",
year = "2012",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1118/1.4754591",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "6580--6584",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Technical Note

T2 - Precision and accuracy of a commercially available CT optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for the measurement of CT dose index

AU - Vrieze, Thomas J.

AU - Sturchio, Glenn M.

AU - McCollough, Cynthia H

PY - 2012/11

Y1 - 2012/11

N2 - Purpose: To determine the precision and accuracy of CTDI100 measurements made using commercially available optically stimulated luminescent (OSL) dosimeters (Landaur, Inc.) as beam width, tube potential, and attenuating material were varied. Methods: One hundred forty OSL dosimeters were individually exposed to a single axial CT scan, either in air, a 16-cm (head), or 32-cm (body) CTDI phantom at both center and peripheral positions. Scans were performed using nominal total beam widths of 3.6, 6, 19.2, and 28.8 mm at 120 kV and 28.8 mm at 80 kV. Five measurements were made for each of 28 parameter combinations. Measurements were made under the same conditions using a 100-mm long CTDI ion chamber. Exposed OSL dosimeters were returned to the manufacturer, who reported dose to air (in mGy) as a function of distance along the probe, integrated dose, and CTDI100. Results: The mean precision averaged over 28 datasets containing five measurements each was 1.4 ± 0.6, range 0.6-2.7 for OSL and 0.08 ± 0.06, range 0.02-0.3 for ion chamber. The root mean square (RMS) percent differences between OSL and ion chamber CTDI 100 values were 13.8, 6.4, and 8.7 for in-Air, head, and body measurements, respectively, with an overall RMS percent difference of 10.1. OSL underestimated CTDI100 relative to the ion chamber 2128 times (75). After manual correction of the 80 kV measurements, the RMS percent differences between OSL and ion chamber measurements were 9.9 and 10.0 for 80 and 120 kV, respectively. Conclusions: Measurements of CTDI100 with commercially available CT OSL dosimeters had a percent standard deviation of 1.4. After energy-dependent correction factors were applied, the RMS percent difference in the measured CTDI100 values was about 10, with a tendency of OSL to underestimate CTDI relative to the ion chamber. Unlike ion chamber methods, however, OSL dosimeters allow measurement of the radiation dose profile.

AB - Purpose: To determine the precision and accuracy of CTDI100 measurements made using commercially available optically stimulated luminescent (OSL) dosimeters (Landaur, Inc.) as beam width, tube potential, and attenuating material were varied. Methods: One hundred forty OSL dosimeters were individually exposed to a single axial CT scan, either in air, a 16-cm (head), or 32-cm (body) CTDI phantom at both center and peripheral positions. Scans were performed using nominal total beam widths of 3.6, 6, 19.2, and 28.8 mm at 120 kV and 28.8 mm at 80 kV. Five measurements were made for each of 28 parameter combinations. Measurements were made under the same conditions using a 100-mm long CTDI ion chamber. Exposed OSL dosimeters were returned to the manufacturer, who reported dose to air (in mGy) as a function of distance along the probe, integrated dose, and CTDI100. Results: The mean precision averaged over 28 datasets containing five measurements each was 1.4 ± 0.6, range 0.6-2.7 for OSL and 0.08 ± 0.06, range 0.02-0.3 for ion chamber. The root mean square (RMS) percent differences between OSL and ion chamber CTDI 100 values were 13.8, 6.4, and 8.7 for in-Air, head, and body measurements, respectively, with an overall RMS percent difference of 10.1. OSL underestimated CTDI100 relative to the ion chamber 2128 times (75). After manual correction of the 80 kV measurements, the RMS percent differences between OSL and ion chamber measurements were 9.9 and 10.0 for 80 and 120 kV, respectively. Conclusions: Measurements of CTDI100 with commercially available CT OSL dosimeters had a percent standard deviation of 1.4. After energy-dependent correction factors were applied, the RMS percent difference in the measured CTDI100 values was about 10, with a tendency of OSL to underestimate CTDI relative to the ion chamber. Unlike ion chamber methods, however, OSL dosimeters allow measurement of the radiation dose profile.

KW - computed tomography (CT)

KW - CT dose index

KW - optically stimulated luminescence

KW - radiation dose profile

KW - radiation dosimetry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84868597448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84868597448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.4754591

DO - 10.1118/1.4754591

M3 - Article

C2 - 23127052

AN - SCOPUS:84868597448

VL - 39

SP - 6580

EP - 6584

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 11

ER -