Development of a CT number calibration audit phantom in photon radiation therapy: A pilot study.
CT number calibration
audit
photon radiation therapy
quality assurance
stoichiometric method
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
02
10
2019
revised:
30
01
2020
accepted:
31
01
2020
pubmed:
7
2
2020
medline:
26
1
2021
entrez:
7
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In photon radiation therapy, computed tomography (CT) numbers are converted into values for mass density (MD) or relative electron density to water (RED). CT-MD or CT-RED calibration tables are relevant for human body dose calculation in an inhomogeneous medium. CT-MD or CT-RED calibration tables are influenced by patient imaging (CT scanner manufacturer, scanning parameters, and patient size), the calibration process (tissue-equivalent phantom manufacturer, and selection of tissue-equivalent material), differences between tissue-equivalent materials and standard tissues, and the dose calculation algorithm applied; however, a CT number calibration audit has not been established. The purposes of this study were to develop a postal audit phantom, and to establish a CT number calibration audit process. A conventional stoichiometric calibration conducts a least square fit of the relationships between the MD, material weight, and measured CT number, using two parameters. In this study, a new stoichiometric CT number calibration scheme has been empirically established, using three parameters to harmonize the calculated CT number with the measured CT number for air and lung tissue. In addition, the suitable material set and the minimal number of materials required for stoichiometric CT number calibration were determined. The MDs and elemental weights from the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 110 were used as standard tissue data, to generate the CT-MD and CT-RED calibration tables. A small-sized, CT number calibration phantom was developed for a postal audit, and stoichiometric CT number calibration with the phantom was compared to the CT number calibration tables registered in the radiotherapy treatment planning systems (RTPSs) associated with five radiotherapy institutions. When a least square fit was performed for the stoichiometric CT number calibration with the three parameters, the calculated CT number showed better agreement with the measured CT number. We established stoichiometric CT number calibration using only two materials because the accuracy of the process was determined not by the number of used materials but by the number of elements contained. The stoichiometric CT number calibration was comparable to the tissue-substitute calibration, with a dose difference less than 1%. An outline of the CT number calibration audit was demonstrated through a multi-institutional study. We established a new stoichiometric CT number calibration method for validating the CT number calibration tables registered in RTPSs. We also developed a CT number calibration phantom for a postal audit, which was verified by the performances of multiple CT scanners located at several institutions. The new stoichiometric CT number calibration has the advantages of being performed using only two materials, and decreasing the difference between the calculated and measured CT numbers for air and lung tissue. In the future, a postal CT number calibration audit might be achievable using a smaller phantom.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32026482
doi: 10.1002/mp.14077
pmc: PMC7216906
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1509-1522Subventions
Organisme : JSPS KAKENHI
ID : 19K17269
Organisme : JSPS KAKENHI
ID : 19K12865
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013 Nov 04;14(6):4417
pubmed: 24257284
Ann ICRP. 1979;3(1-4):iii
pubmed: 20863799
Phys Med Biol. 2016 Jul 7;61(13):5037-50
pubmed: 27300449
J Radiat Res. 2014 May;55(3):600-7
pubmed: 24385469
Phys Med. 2018 Jan;45:59-64
pubmed: 29472091
Med Phys. 2016 Jan;43(1):495
pubmed: 26745942
Phys Med Biol. 2000 Feb;45(2):459-78
pubmed: 10701515
Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018 Apr 24;6:5-11
pubmed: 33458381
Med Phys. 2014 Oct;41(10):101712
pubmed: 25281951
Ann ICRP. 2009;39(2):1-164
pubmed: 19897132
Phys Med Biol. 2006 Nov 7;51(21):5409-17
pubmed: 17047260
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Jun;20(6):45-52
pubmed: 31081175
Phys Med Biol. 2007 Feb 7;52(3):539-62
pubmed: 17228104
Neuroradiology. 1976;11(1):15-21
pubmed: 934468
Med Phys. 2007 Jun;34(6):2070-6
pubmed: 17654910
Acta Diabetol. 2003 Oct;40 Suppl 1:S242-5
pubmed: 14618483
Phys Med Biol. 1996 Jan;41(1):111-24
pubmed: 8685250
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 Jan;19(1):271-275
pubmed: 29152898
Phys Med Biol. 2012 Mar 7;57(5):1173-90
pubmed: 22330195
Med Phys. 2003 Oct;30(10):2762-92
pubmed: 14596315
Br J Radiol. 1974 Feb;47(554):115-21
pubmed: 4206210
Med Phys. 1992 Mar-Apr;19(2):325-7
pubmed: 1584125
Phys Med. 2012 Jan;28(1):33-42
pubmed: 21419682
Phys Med. 2018 Mar;47:42-49
pubmed: 29609817