Effects of 16-bit CT imaging scanning conditions for metal implants on radiotherapy dose distribution
- Authors:
- Liugang Gao
- Hongfei Sun
- Xinye Ni
- Mingming Fang
- Tao Lin
View Affiliations
Affiliations: Radiotherapy Department, Second People's Hospital of Changzhou, Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou 213003, P.R. China, Radiotherapy Department, Changzhou Cancer Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou 213001, P.R. China
- Published online on: December 11, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.7586
-
Pages:
2373-2379
-
Copyright: © Gao
et al. This is an open access article distributed under the
terms of Creative
Commons Attribution License.
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Abstract
Dose distribution was calculated and analyzed on the basis of 16‑bit computed tomography (CT) images in order to investigate the effect of scanning conditions on CT for metal implants. Stainless steel and titanium rods were inserted into a phantom, and CT images were obtained by scanning the phantom under various scanning conditions: i) Fixed tube current of 230 mA and tube voltages of 100, 120, and 140 kV; and ii) fixed tube voltage of 120 kV and tube currents of 180, 230, and 280 mA. The CT value of the metal rod was examined and corrected. In a Varian treatment planning system, a treatment plan was designed on the basis of the CT images obtained under the set scanning conditions. The dose distributions in the phantom were then calculated and compared. The CT value of the metal area slightly changed upon tube current alteration. The dose distribution in the phantom was also similar. The maximum CT values of the stainless steel rod were 14,568, 14,127 and 13,295 HU when the tube voltages were modified to 100, 120, and 140 kV, respectively. The corresponding CT values of the titanium rod were 9,420, 8,140 and 7,310 HU. The dose distribution of the radiotherapy plan changed significantly as the tube voltage varied. Compared with the reference dose, the respective maximum dose differences of the stainless steel and titanium rods in the phantom were 5.70, and 6.62% when the tube voltage varied. The changes in tube currents resulted in a maximum dose error of <1% for stainless steel and titanium. In CT imaging, changes in tube voltages can significantly alter the CT values of metal implants. Thus, this can lead to large errors in radiotherapy dose distributions.
View Figures |
Figure 1
|
|
Figure 2
|
|
Figure 3
|
|
Figure 4
|
|
Figure 5
|
|
Figure 6
|
|
Figure 7
|
|
Figure 8
|
View References
1
|
Keall PJ, Chock LB, Jeraj R, Siebers JV
and Mohan R: Image reconstruction and the effect on dose
calculation for hip prostheses. Med Dosim. 28:113–117. 2003.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
2
|
Keall PJ, Siebers JV, Jeraj R and Mohan R:
Radiotherapy dose calculations in the presence of hip prostheses.
Med Dosim. 28:107–112. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar
|
3
|
Glide-Hurst C, Chen D, Zhong H and Chetty
IJ: Changes Realized from extended bit-depth and metal artifact
reduction in CT. Med Phys. 40:0617112013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
4
|
Link TM, Berning W, Scherf S, Joosten U,
Joist A, Engelke K and Daldrup-Link HE: CT of metal implants:
Reduction of artifacts using an extended CT scale technique. J
Comput Assist Tomogr. 24:165–172. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
5
|
Paudel MR, Mackenzie M, Fallone BG and
Rathee S: Evaluation of normalized metal artifact reduction (NMAR)
in kVCT Using MVCT prior images for radiotherapy treatment
planning. Med Phys. 40:0817012013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
6
|
Coolens C and Childs PJ: Calibration of CT
Hounsfield units for radiotherapy treatment planning of patients
with metallic hip prostheses: The use of the extended CT-scale.
Phys Med Biol. 48:1591–1603. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
7
|
Schneider U, Pedroni E and Lomax A: The
calibration of CT hounsfield units for radiotherapy treatment
planning. Phys Med Biol. 41:111–124. 1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
8
|
Thomas SJ: Relative electron density
calibration of CT scanners for radiotherapy treatment planning. Br
J Radiol. 72:781–786. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
9
|
Zurl B, Tiefling R, Winkler P, Kindl P and
Kapp KS: Hounsfield units variations: Impact on CT-density based
conversion tables and their effects on dose distribution.
Strahlenther Onkol. 190:88–93. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
10
|
Newhauser WD, Giebeler A, Langen KM,
Mirkovic D and Mohan R: Can megavoltage computed tomography reduce
proton range uncertainties in treatment plans for patients with
large metal implants? Phys Med Biol. 53:2327–2344. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
11
|
Ebert MA, Lambert J and Greer PB: CT-ED
conversion on a GE Lightspeed-RT scanner: Influence of scanner
settings. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 31:154–159. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
12
|
Saw CB, Loper A, Komanduri K, Combine T,
Huq S and Scicutella C: Determination of CT-to-density conversion
relationship for image-based treatment planning systems. Med Dosim.
30:145–148. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
13
|
Constantinou C, Harrington JC and DeWerd
LA: An electron density calibration phantom for CT-based treatment
planning computers. Med Phys. 19:325–327. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
14
|
Skrzyński W, Zielińska-Dabrowska S,
Wachowicz M, Slusarczyk-Kacprzyk W, Kukołowicz PF and Bulski W:
Computed tomography as a source of electron density information for
radiation treatment planning. Strahlenther Onkol. 186:327–333.
2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
15
|
Zabel-du Bois A, Ackermann B, Hauswald H,
Schramm O, Sroka-Perez G, Huber P, Debus J and Milker-Zabel S:
Influence of intravenous contrast agent on dose calculation in 3-D
treatment planning for radiosurgery of cerebral arteriovenous
malformations. Strahlenther Onkol. 185:318–324. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
16
|
Ramm U, Damrau M, Mose S, Manegold KH,
Rahl CG and Böttcher HD: Influence of CT contrast agents on dose
calculations in a 3D treatment planning system. Phys Med Biol.
46:2631–2635. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|