Comparison of topogram-based body size indices for CT dose consideration and scan protocol optimization
Purpose: To retrospectively compare different topogram-based patient body size indices and to determine the optimal topogram-based body size index as a basis for body computed tomography (CT) dose consideration and scan protocol optimization. Methods: Forty-three routine thorax and abdomen CT scans...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medical physics (Lancaster) 2012-06, Vol.39 (6), p.3456-3465 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose:
To retrospectively compare different topogram-based patient body size indices and to determine the optimal topogram-based body size index as a basis for body computed tomography (CT) dose consideration and scan protocol optimization.
Methods:
Forty-three routine thorax and abdomen CT scans are studied retrospectively, with patient ages ranging from 18 to 67 yr. The individual patient’s water-equivalent diameter (D
w
) of the scanned body region is computed from CT DICOM images as the “gold standard,” after first converting from Hounsfield units values to μa values, where μ is the normalized tissue attenuation coefficient and a is the area per pixel. Four topogram-based body size indices [average diameter
(
D
¯
)
, girth (G), topogram projection area (E
topo), and improved topogram projection area
(
E
topo
'
)
] are computed and correlated with D
w
using linear regression analysis. Specifically,
D
¯
is calculated by averaging the coronal and sagittal diameters; G is computed by modeling the patient’s cross-section as an ellipse; E
topo is the product of the mean topogram pixel value and the width of the scanned body region; and
(
E
topo
'
)
incorporates E
topo with correction of patient miscentering and water attenuation coefficient. The accuracy of these four approaches for estimation of D
w
is assessed using linear regression models. Results are given in terms of 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results:
Regression analysis results in four different linear models. The standard error (95% CI) for estimation ofD
w
from
D
¯
and G was ±2.8 and ±3.1 cm, respectively (p = 0.297). The standard error for estimation of D
w
from E
topo was significantly less than that from
D
¯
(±2.1 cm, p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0094-2405 2473-4209 |
DOI: | 10.1118/1.4718569 |