Measurement of Effective Dose to Head and Neck Critical Organs in Computed Tomography

الموضوعات :

Amir Hosein Goodarzi ¹ , Mastaneh Sanei ² , Hadi Hasanzadeh ³ , Zohreh Khosravi ⁴ , Ahmad Bitarafan-Rajabi ⁵ , Alireza Emadi ⁶

1 - Department of Radiation Oncology, Iran Gamma Knife Center, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of Radiation Oncology, Haft-e-Tir Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 - Department of Radiation Oncology, Pardis Noor Niloo Medical Imaging and Cancer Center, Tehran, Iran
4 - Department of Radiation Oncology, Iran Gamma Knife Center, Tehran, Iran
5 - Cardiovascular Interventional Research Center, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
6 - Deputy of Research and Technology, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

تاريخ الإرسال : 14 الجمعة , ربيع الثاني, 1443 تاريخ التأكيد : 09 الأحد , رمضان, 1443 تاريخ الإصدار : 17 الجمعة , جمادى الأولى, 1445

الکلمات المفتاحية: Computed Tomography Scan, Film Dosimetry, Phantoms, Carcinogenesis,

ملخص المقالة :

One of the most effective methods to report organ dose in CT scan (Computed Tomography scan) is to report effective dose. This study aimed to investigate the actual dose during head and neck CT scans using an anthropomorphic head phantom. In this study, an anthropomorphic phantom was constructed with natural bone and paraffin wax. Then, we considered several sites in the phantom to investigate the dose. These sites include the Brain, Thyroid, Parotid, and Lens, which were filled by Gafchromic films. Finally, we irradiated the phantom using several CT protocols.Our findings indicate that the dose of the considered organs was in the different ranges according to the protocol used. The highest dose range was related to the ten-slice spiral, ranging from 0.75 to 15.8 mGy (Mean). We showed the lowest dose range in SPECT-CT which was in the range of 0.55 to 0.1 mGy (Mean). The absorbed dose of the eyes was much higher in most protocols compared to the other organs. There is also the most significant difference between the lens and the other organs in the ten-slice spiral CT. Comparing the 10 and 256 slice scanners; we showed that the organ dose in the 256 slice is less than ten slices. The lowest mean organ dose (mGy) and SD (Standard Deviation) are related to the SPECT CT, which are 0.76±0.03, 0.95±0.02, 0.78±0.02, and 0.71±0.02 for the brain, parotid, lens, and thyroid, respectively.

المصادر:

1. 1. Omar R., Hashim S., Ghoshal S., Shariff N., 2020. Dose assessment of 4-and 16-slice multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) scanners. Radiation Physics and Chemistry. 168, 108445.


2. 2. Hu S.Y, Hsieh M.S., Lin M-Y, Hsu C.Y., Lin T.C., How C.K., Wang C.Y., Che-Huang Tsai J., Wu Y.H., Chang Y.Z., 2016. Trends of CT utilisation in an emergency department in Taiwan: a 5-year retrospective study. BMJ open. 6(6), e010973. 


3. 3. De Gonzalez A.B., Salotti J.A., McHugh K., Little M.P., Harbron R.W., Lee C., Ntowe E., Braganza M.Z., Parker L., Rajaraman P., Stiller C., Stewart D.R., Craft A.W., Pearce M.S., 2016. Relationship between paediatric CT scans and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: assessment of the impact of underlying conditions. British journal of cancer. 114(4), 388-94.


4. 4. Alkhorayef M., Babikir E., Alrushoud A., Al-Mohammed H., Sulieman A., 2017. Patient radiation biological risk in computed tomography angiography procedure. Saudi journal of biological sciences. 24(2), 235-40.


5. 5. Griglock T.M., Sinclair L., Mench A., Cormack B., Bidari S., Rill L., Arreola M., 2015. Determining organ doses from CT with Direct measurements in postmortem subjects: part 1—methodology and validation. Radiology. 277(2), 463-70.


6. 6. Seyedatashi S.F., Athari M., Bitarafan-Rajabi A., Hasanzadeh H., Rafati M., Pouraliakbar H.R., Mohamadzadeh A., 2015. Dosimetric evaluation of multislice ct using anthropomorphichead phantom. Frontiers in Biomedical Technologies. 2(1), 31-35.


7. 7. Al Ewaidat H., Zheng X., Khader Y., Abdelrahman M., Mustafa Alhasan M.K., Rawashdeh M.A., Dana Samir A.M., Khaled Zayed A.A., 2018. Assessment of radiation dose and image quality of multidetector computed tomography. Iranian Journal of Radiology. 15(3), e59554.


8. 8. Smith-Bindman R., Lipson J., Marcus R., Kim K.P., Mahesh M., Gould R., Berrington de González A., L Miglioretti D., 2009. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Archives of Internal Medicine. 169(22), 2078-86.


9. 9. Sheppard J.P., Nguyen T., Alkhalid Y., Beckett J.S., Salamon N., Yang I., 2018. Risk of brain tumor induction from pediatric head CT procedures: a systematic literature review. Brain tumor research and treatment. 6(1), 1.


10. 10. Santos F.S., Santana Pd.C., Alnso T.C., Mourão A.P., 2018. Dose variation with the use of eye bismuth shielding on head CT scans. Quarta Semana de Engenharia Nuclear e Ciências das Radiações. 31-36.


11. 11. Akpochafor M.O., Adeneye S.O., Habeebu M.Y., Omojola A., Adedewe N., Adedokun A., Adewa D., Ajibade S.O., Ekpo V., Adebayo Aweda M., 2019. Organ Dose Measurement in Computed Tomography Using Thermoluminescence Dosimeter in Locally Developed Phantoms. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics. 16(2), 126-32.


12. 12. Giansante L., Martins J.C., Nersissian D.Y., Kiers K.C., Kay F.U., Sawamura M.V., Lee C., M. M. S. Gebrim E., R. Costa P., 2019. Organ doses evaluation for chest computed tomography procedures with TL dosimeters: Comparison with Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 20(1), 308-20.


13. 13. Kopp M., Loewe T., Wuest W., Brand M., Wetzl M., Nitsch W., Schmidt D., Beck M., Schmidt B., Uder M., May M., 2020. Individual calculation of effective dose and risk of malignancy based on Monte Carlo simulations after whole body computed tomography. Scientific Reports. 10(1), 1-12.


14. 14. Akpochafor M.O., Adeneye S.O., Ololade K., Omojola A.D., Adedewe N., Adedokun A., Aweda M., Aboyewa O.B., 2019. Development of computed tomography head and body phantom for organ dosimetry. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics. 16(1), 8-14.


15. 15. Lin H.C., Lai T.J., Tseng H.C., Wang C.H., Tseng Y.L., Chen C.Y., 2019. Radiation doses with various body weights of phantoms in brain 128-slice MDCT examination. Journal of Radiation Research. 60(4), 466-75.

16 .Hsieh C.C., Li C.Z., Lin M.C., Yang Y.J., Hong K.T., Chen Y.H., Syu Z.H., Ju D.T., 2018. Dose comparison using thermoluminescent dosimeters during multislice computed tomography with different parameters for simulated spine tumor examination. Health Physics. 115(2), 275-80.

17. 17. Brady Z., Cain T., Johnston P., 2012. Comparison of organ dosimetry methods and effective dose calculation methods for paediatric CT. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 35(2), 117-34.


18. 18. Osei E.K., Darko J., 2013. A survey of organ equivalent and effective doses from diagnostic radiology procedures. International Scholarly Research Notices. 2013, 1-9.


19. 19. Taha T., Allehyani S., 2020. Measurements Absorbed Doses to Some Organs during Head CT Imaging. International Journal of Science and Research. 9(1), 1-3.


20. 20. Jaffe T.A., Hoang J.K., Yoshizumi T.T., Toncheva G., Lowry C., Ravin C., 2010. Radiation dose for routine clinical adult brain CT: variability on different scanners at one institution. American Journal of Roentgenology. 195(2), 433-8.


21. 21. Brady S.L., Mirro A.E., Moore B.M., Kaufman R.A., 2015. How to appropriately calculate effective dose for CT using either size-specific dose estimates or dose-length product. American Journal of Roentgenology. 204(5), 953-8.


22. 22. Yamashita K., Higashino K., Hayashi H., Takegami K., Hayashi F., Tsuruo Y., Sairyo K., 2021. Direct measurement of radiation exposure dose to individual organs during diagnostic computed tomography examination. Scientific Reports. 11(1), 1-10.


23. 23. Omer H., Alameen S., Mahmoud W.E., Sulieman A., Nasir O., Abolaban F., 2021. Eye lens and thyroid gland radiation exposure for patients undergoing brain computed tomography examination. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 28(1), 342-6.


24. 24. Moore W.H., Bonvento M., Olivieri-Fitt R., 2006. Comparison of MDCT radiation dose: a phantom study. American Journal of Roentgenology. 187(5), 498-502.