These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Ion range estimation by using dual energy computed tomography.
    Author: Hünemohr N, Krauss B, Dinkel J, Gillmann C, Ackermann B, Jäkel O, Greilich S.
    Journal: Z Med Phys; 2013 Dec; 23(4):300-13. PubMed ID: 23597413.
    Abstract:
    Inaccurate conversion of CT data to water-equivalent path length (WEPL) is one of the most important uncertainty sources in ion treatment planning. Dual energy CT (DECT) imaging might help to reduce CT number ambiguities with the additional information. In our study we scanned a series of materials (tissue substitutes, aluminum, PMMA, and other polymers) in the dual source scanner (Siemens Somatom Definition Flash). Based on the 80kVp/140SnkVp dual energy images, the electron densities ϱe and effective atomic numbers Zeff were calculated. We introduced a new lookup table that translates the ϱe to the WEPL. The WEPL residuals from the calibration were significantly reduced for the investigated tissue surrogates compared to the empirical Hounsfield-look-up table (single energy CT imaging) from (-1.0±1.8)% to (0.1±0.7)% and for non-tissue equivalent PMMA from -7.8% to -1.0%. To assess the benefit of the new DECT calibration, we conducted a treatment planning study for three different idealized cases based on tissue surrogates and PMMA. The DECT calibration yielded a significantly higher target coverage in tissue surrogates and phantom material (i.e. PMMA cylinder, mean target coverage improved from 62% to 98%). To verify the DECT calibration for real tissue, ion ranges through a frozen pig head were measured and compared to predictions calculated by the standard single energy CT calibration and the novel DECT calibration. By using this method, an improvement of ion range estimation from -2.1% water-equivalent thickness deviation (single energy CT) to 0.3% (DECT) was achieved. If one excludes raypaths located on the edge of the sample accompanied with high uncertainties, no significant difference could be observed.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]