Assessment of different patient‐to‐phantom matching criteria applied in Monte Carlo–based computed tomography dosimetry

Purpose: To quantify differences in computationally estimated computed tomography (CT) organ doses for patient‐specific voxel phantoms to estimated organ doses in matched computational phantoms using different matching criteria. Materials and methods: Fifty‐two patient‐specific computational voxel phantoms were created through CT image segmentation. In addition, each patient‐specific phantom was matched to six computational phantoms of the same gender based, respectively, on age and gender (reference phantoms), height and weight, effective diameter (both central slice and exam range average), and water equivalent diameter (both central slice and exam range average). Each patient‐specific phantom and matched computational phantom were then used to simulate six different torso examinations using a previously validated Monte Carlo CT dosimetry methodology that accounts for tube current modulation. Organ doses for each patient‐specific phantom were then compared with the organ dose estimates of each of the matched phantoms. Results: Relative to the corresponding patient‐specific phantoms, the root mean square of the difference in organ dose was 39.1%, 20.3%, 22.7%, 21.6%, 20.5%, and 17.6%, for reference, height and weight, effective diameter (central slice and scan average), and water equivalent diameter (central slice and scan average), respectively. The average magnitude of difference in organ dose was 24%, 14%, 16.9%, 16.2%, 14%, and 11.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Overall, these data suggest that matching a patient to a computational phantom in a library is superior to matching to a reference phantom. Water equivalent diameter is the superior matching metric, but it is less feasible to implement in a clinical and retrospective setting. For these reasons, height‐and‐weight matching is an acceptable and reliable method for matching a patient to a member of a computational phantom library with regard to CT dosimetry.

[1]  Stephanie Lamart,et al.  Computational lymphatic node models in pediatric and adult hybrid phantoms for radiation dosimetry , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  W P Segars,et al.  Realistic reference adult and paediatric phantom series for internal and external dosimetry. , 2012, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[3]  Wesley E Bolch,et al.  The UF/NCI family of hybrid computational phantoms representing the current US population of male and female children, adolescents, and adults—application to CT dosimetry , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  D. Long.  Monte Carlo calculations of patient organ doses in Toshiba computed tomography examinations with automatic tube current modulation: A feasibility study , 2013 .

[5]  J H Siewerdsen,et al.  Spektr: a computational tool for x-ray spectral analysis and imaging system optimization. , 2004, Medical physics.

[6]  Perry B. Johnson,et al.  The impact of anthropometric patient-phantom matching on organ dose: a hybrid phantom study for fluoroscopy guided interventions. , 2011, Medical physics.

[7]  J. Valentin.  Basic anatomical and physiological data for use in radiological protection: reference values , 2002, Annals of the ICRP.

[8]  V. Cassola,et al.  Standing adult human phantoms based on 10th, 50th and 90th mass and height percentiles of male and female Caucasian populations , 2011, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  Daniel E. Hyer,et al.  Construction of anthropomorphic phantoms for use in dosimetry studies , 2009, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[10]  Wesley E Bolch,et al.  Physical validation of a Monte Carlo‐based, phantom‐derived approach to computed tomography organ dosimetry under tube current modulation , 2017, Medical physics.

[11]  Daniel Lodwick,et al.  The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  W P Segars,et al.  Population of anatomically variable 4D XCAT adult phantoms for imaging research and optimization. , 2013, Medical physics.

[13]  Rochester,et al.  Use of Water Equivalent Diameter for Calculating Patient Size and Size-Specific Dose Estimates (SSDE) in CT: The Report of AAPM Task Group 220. , 2014, AAPM report.

[14]  Aiping Ding,et al.  Extension of RPI-adult male and female computational phantoms to obese patients and a Monte Carlo study of the effect on CT imaging dose , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  Chengyu Shi,et al.  RADAR Reference Adult, Pediatric, and Pregnant Female Phantom Series for Internal and External Dosimetry , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  V F Cassola,et al.  FASH and MASH: female and male adult human phantoms based on polygon mesh surfaces: I. Development of the anatomy , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  Cynthia H McCollough,et al.  A method to generate equivalent energy spectra and filtration models based on measurement for multidetector CT Monte Carlo dosimetry simulations. , 2009, Medical physics.

[18]  John M Boone,et al.  Reply to "Comment on the 'Report of AAPM TG 204: Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations'" [AAPM Report 204, 2011]. , 2012, Medical physics.