Comparison of Measured Values of CTDI and DPL with Standard Reference values of Different CT Scanners for dose Management

Authors

  • Issahaku Shirazu  University of Cape Coast, School of Agriculture and Physical Sciences Faculty of Physical Sciences, Department of Physics, Cape coast, Ghana
  • Y. B Mensah  University of Ghana Medical School, Department of Radiology, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra Ghana
  • Cyril Schandorf  Graduate School of Nuclear and Allied Sciences, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana
  • S. Y. Mensah  Ghana Atomic Energy Commission, Radiological and Medical Sciences Research Institute, Medical Radiation Physics Centre, Accra, Ghana
  • Alfred Owusu  University of Cape Coast, School of Agriculture and Physical Sciences Faculty of Physical Sciences, Department of Physics, Cape coast, Ghana

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST17319

Keywords:

CTDIVOL, DLP, ICRP, Dose Optimisation, Air Karma Index

Abstract

The study is based on estimate of CTDI and DLP values for patients' dose optimization procedures. Technical parameters were obtained for three groups of randomly selected patients undergoing abdominal CT examinations of 320 patients of age 20-80 years. The measured values were obtained on image data and the standard reference values of various machines were obtained from service manual as part of QC/QA and the recommended values from ICRP publication 103. The mean CTDI and DLP parameters were; 6.33mGy and 936.25mGy respectively. Furthermore, the mean recorded values of CTDIVOL values were well within ICRP recommendation when the protocol was completed in one scan. On the other hand, in the case of multiscan the total CTDIVol was higher than the ICRP recommendations. While the mean DLP values were higher than the recommended value of 780 mGy-cm by ICRP publication 103. Finally, approximately 37% of the total varied CTDI and DLP values were higher than the recommended dose by ICRP publication 103.

References

  1. Mullenders L, Atkinson M, Paretzke H, Sabatier L, Bouffler S. Assessing cancer risks of low-dose radiation. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2009; 9: Page: 596–604.
  2. Rothkamm K, Lobrich M. Evidence for a lack of DNA double-strand break repair in human cells exposed to very low x-ray doses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2003; 100: Pages: 5057–5062.
  3. Perisinakis K, Damilakis J, Tzedakis A, Papadakis A, Theocharopoulos N, Gourtsoyannis N, 2007, “Determination of the weighted CT Dose Index in modern multi detector CT scanners”, Physics in Medicine and Radiology, 2007, 52: Pages: 6485- 6495.
  4. AAPM Report No. 39, “Specification and Acceptance Testing of Computed Tomography Scanners”, 1993
  5. AAPM Report No.96, “The measurement, Reporting, and Management of Radiation Dose in CT”, 2008
  6. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann. ICRP. 2007; 37(2–4):1–332
  7. Origgi D, Vigorito S, Villa G, Bellomi M, Tosi G, Survey of Computed Tomography techniques and absorbed dose in Italian hospitals: a comparison between two methods to estimate the dose-length product and the effective dose and to verify fulfillment of the diagnostic reference levels, Eur. Radiol., 2006,
  8. Bushberg JT, et al. The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging. 3rd Ed. Section 3.3.

International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology

Downloads

Published

2017-02-28

Issue

Volume 3, Issue 1, January-February-2017

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) IJSRST

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

[1]
Issahaku Shirazu, Y. B Mensah, Cyril Schandorf, S. Y. Mensah, Alfred Owusu "Comparison of Measured Values of CTDI and DPL with Standard Reference values of Different CT Scanners for dose Management" International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology(IJSRST), Online ISSN : 2395-602X, Print ISSN : 2395-6011,Volume 3, Issue 1, pp.185-190 , January-February-2017. Available at doi : https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST17319