Purpose: This study aims to compare two methods for the organ dose evaluation in computed tomography (CT) in the head- and thorax regions: an experimental method, using radiochromic films, and a computational one, using a commercial software. Methods: Gafchromic® XR-QA2 and EBT-3 were characterized in terms of energetic, angular, and irradiation configurations dependence. Two free-in-air irradiation calibration configurations were employed using a CT scanner: with the sensitive surface of the film orthogonal (OC) and parallel (PC) to the beam axis. Different dose–response curves were obtained by varying the irradiation configurations and the beam quality (BQ). Subsequently, films were irradiated within an anthropomorphic phantom using CT-thorax and -head protocols, and the organ dose values obtained were compared with those provided by the commercial software. Results: At different configurations, an unchanged dose response was achieved with EBT-3, while a dose response of 15% was obtained with XR-QA2. By varying BQ, XR-QA2 showed a different response below 10%, while EBT-3 showed a variation below 5% for dose values >20 mGy. For films irradiation angle equal to 90°, the normalized to 0° relative response was 41% for the XR-QA2 model and 83% for the EBT-3 one. Organ dose values obtained with EBT-3 for both configurations and with XR-QA2 for OC were in agreement with the DW values, showing percentage discrepancies of less than 25%. Conclusions: The obtained results showed the potential of EBT-3 in CT patient dosimetry since the lower angular dependence, compared to XR-QA2, compensates for low sensitivity in the diagnostic dose range.

Organ dose in CT: Comparison between measurements and computational methods

D'Anna A.;Gueli A. M.;Stella G.
;
Marino C.
2023-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to compare two methods for the organ dose evaluation in computed tomography (CT) in the head- and thorax regions: an experimental method, using radiochromic films, and a computational one, using a commercial software. Methods: Gafchromic® XR-QA2 and EBT-3 were characterized in terms of energetic, angular, and irradiation configurations dependence. Two free-in-air irradiation calibration configurations were employed using a CT scanner: with the sensitive surface of the film orthogonal (OC) and parallel (PC) to the beam axis. Different dose–response curves were obtained by varying the irradiation configurations and the beam quality (BQ). Subsequently, films were irradiated within an anthropomorphic phantom using CT-thorax and -head protocols, and the organ dose values obtained were compared with those provided by the commercial software. Results: At different configurations, an unchanged dose response was achieved with EBT-3, while a dose response of 15% was obtained with XR-QA2. By varying BQ, XR-QA2 showed a different response below 10%, while EBT-3 showed a variation below 5% for dose values >20 mGy. For films irradiation angle equal to 90°, the normalized to 0° relative response was 41% for the XR-QA2 model and 83% for the EBT-3 one. Organ dose values obtained with EBT-3 for both configurations and with XR-QA2 for OC were in agreement with the DW values, showing percentage discrepancies of less than 25%. Conclusions: The obtained results showed the potential of EBT-3 in CT patient dosimetry since the lower angular dependence, compared to XR-QA2, compensates for low sensitivity in the diagnostic dose range.
2023
Diagnostic radiology
DoseWatch™
EBT-3
Patient dosimetry
XR-QA2
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2023_Pace et al_PM_Gaf.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 6.45 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
6.45 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/566529
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact