Automatic patient centering for MDCT: effect on radiation dose.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to determine with phantom and patient imaging the effect of an automatic patient-centering technique on the radiation dose associated with MDCT. SUBJECTS AND METHODS A 32-cm CT dose index (CTDI) phantom was scanned with 64-MDCT in three positions: gantry isocenter and 30 and 60 mm below the isocenter of the scanner gantry. In each position, surface, peripheral, and volume CTDIs were estimated with a standard 10-cm pencil ionization chamber. The institutional review board approved the study with 63 patients (36 men, 27 women; mean age, 51 years; age range, 22-83 years) undergoing chest (n = 18) or abdominal (n = 45) CT using the z-axis automatic exposure control technique. Each patient was positioned according to the region being scanned and then was centered in the gantry. Before scanning of a patient, automatic centering software was used to estimate patient off-centering and percentage of dose reduction with optimum recentering. Data were analyzed with linear correlation and the Student's t test. RESULTS Peripheral and surface CTDIs increased approximately 12-18% with 30-mm off-center distance and 41-49% with 60-mm off-center distance. Approximately 95% (60/63) of patients were not positioned accurately in the gantry isocenter. The mean radiation dose saving with automatic centering of all patients was 13.0% +/- 0.9% (range, 2.6-29.9%). There was strong correlation between off-center distance and percentage of surface CTDI reduction with recentering of patients in the gantry isocenter (r2 = 0.85, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Surfaces doses can be reduced if radiologic technologists can better center patients within the CT gantry. Automatic centering technique can help in optimum patient centering and result in as much as 30% reduction in surface dose.

[1]  Mannudeep K Kalra,et al.  Radiation Exposure and Projected Risks With Multidetector-Row Computed Tomography Scanning: Clinical Strategies and Technologic Developments for Dose Reduction , 2004, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[2]  Application of Automatic Vertical Positioning Software to Reduce Radiation Exposure in Multidetector Row Computed Tomography of the Chest , 2008, Investigative radiology.

[3]  T. Toth Dose reduction opportunities for CT scanners , 2002, Pediatric Radiology.

[4]  Thomas Toth,et al.  The influence of patient centering on CT dose and image noise. , 2007, Medical physics.

[5]  Mannudeep K Kalra,et al.  Current status and future directions in technical developments of cardiac computed tomography. , 2008, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[6]  M. Kalra,et al.  Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. , 2004, Radiology.

[7]  A. S. Guimarães,et al.  The radiologist’s conundrum: benefits and costs of increasing CT capacity and utilization , 2008, European Radiology.

[8]  Thomas L Toth,et al.  Sixteen-detector row CT of abdomen and pelvis: study for optimization of Z-axis modulation technique performed in 153 patients. , 2004, Radiology.

[9]  D. Dance,et al.  Analysis of surface dose variation in CT procedures. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[10]  D. Dance,et al.  Monte Carlo simulations in CT for the study of the surface air kerma and energy imparted to phantoms of varying size and position. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  G. Boland The CT dose and utilization controversy: the radiologist's response. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[12]  R. Kakinuma,et al.  Low-dose CT screening for lung cancer with automatic exposure control: phantom study , 2008, Radiological physics and technology.

[13]  M. Kalra,et al.  Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. , 2004, Radiology.