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.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported in part by Landauer, Inc., who supplied the CT OSL dosimeters used in this study. Additional support was provided from National Institutes of Health (NIH) RO1 EB04898-01A1-03. The paper was prepared with the assistance provided by Kristina Nunez.
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 - CT dose index
KW - computed tomography (CT)
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
SN - 0094-2405
VL - 39
SP - 6580
EP - 6584
JO - Medical physics
JF - Medical physics
IS - 11
ER -