Validation of a dose tracking software for skin dose map calculation in interventional radiology |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Medical Physics Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162 Milano, Italy;2. PACSHealth, LLC, Scottsdale, AZ, USA;1. Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK), P.O. Box 14, 00881 Helsinki, Finland;2. Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), BP17, 92262 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex, France;3. Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences (VINCA), University of Belgrade, P.O. Box 522, 11001 Belgrade, Serbia;4. Belgian Nuclear Research Centre (SCK-CEN), Boeretang 200, BE-2400 Mol, Belgium;5. Greek Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC), P.O. Box 60092, Ag. Paraskevi, 15310 Athens, Greece;6. Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine (NIOM), 8 Sw. Teresy, Str., 91-348 ?ód?, Poland;7. National Centre for Radiation Protection in Health Care, 6 Smugowa St., 91-433 Lodz, Poland;8. Ru?er Bo?kovi? Institute (RBI), Bijeni?ka c. 54, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia;9. Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, ul Radzikowskiego 152, PL-31-342 Kraków, Poland;10. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège (CHULg), Sart-Tilman, 4000 Liège, Belgium;11. Istituto Oncologico Veneto (IOV), Via Gattamelata 64, 35124 Padova, Italy;12. Medical Physics, Radiobiology and Radiation Protection Group of IPO Porto Research Center (CI-IPOP) and Medical Physics Department, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (IPO Porto), Porto, Portugal;13. Udine University Hospital (AOUD), ple S. Maria della Misericordia, 15, 33100 Udine, Italy;1. Scuola di Scienze della Salute Umana, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Firenze, Italy;2. Dipartimento di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Firenze, Italy;3. Unità Operativa di Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda USL Toscana Centro, Prato, Italy;4. Unità Operativa di Fisica Sanitaria, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italy;5. Università degli Studi di Firenze, Firenze, Italy;6. INFN, sezione di Firenze, Italy;1. Medical Physics, Azienda Ospedaliera Brotzu Cagliari, Italy;2. Interventional Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Brotzu Cagliari, Italy;1. Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain;2. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain;3. Hospital Valle de Hebrón, Barcelona, Spain;4. Hospital Juan Ramón Jiménez, Huelva, Spain;5. Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain;6. Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Sta. Cruz de Tenerife, Spain;7. Hospital Universitario Basurto, Bilbao, Spain;8. Hospital Puerta de Hierro, Madrid, Spain;9. Hospital Universitario Infanta Cristina, Badajoz, Spain;10. Hospital de Mérida, Badajoz, Spain;11. Hospital de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain;12. Hospital Universitario Valme, Sevilla, Spain;13. Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Mallorca, Spain;14. Hospital de León, Spain;15. Hospital Virgen de Arrixaca, Murcia, Spain;1. UO Fisica Sanitaria, AOU Careggi, Firenze, Italy;2. Scuola di Specializzazione in Fisica Medica, Università degli Studi di Firenze, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | PurposeValidate the skin dose software within the radiation dose index monitoring system NEXODOSE]® (Bracco Injeneering S.A., Lausanne, Switzerland). It provides the skin dose distribution in interventional radiology (IR) procedures.MethodsTo determine the skin dose distribution and the Peak Skin Dose (PSD) in IR procedures, the software uses exposure and geometrical parameters taken from the radiation dose structured report and additional information specific to each angiographic system. To test the accuracy of the software, GafChromic® XR-RV3 films, wrapped under a cylindrical PMMA phantom, were irradiated with different setups. Calculations and films results are compared in terms of absolute dose and geometric accuracy, using two angiographic systems (Philips Integris Allura FD20, Siemens AXIOM-ArtisZeego).ResultsCalculated and film measured PSD values agree with an average difference of 7% ± 5%. The discrepancies in dose evaluation increase up to 33% in lower dose regions, because the algorithm does not consider the out-of-field scatter contribution of the neighboring fields, which is more significant in these areas. Regarding the geometric accuracy, the differences between the simulated dose spatial distributions and the measured ones are<3 mm (4%) in simple tests and 5 mm (5%) in setups closer to clinical practice. Moreover, similar results are obtained for the two studied angiographic system vendors.ConclusionsNEXODOSE]® provides an accurate skin dose distribution and PSD estimate. It will allow faster and more accurate monitoring of patient follow-up in the future. |
| |
| Keywords: | Interventional Radiology Peak Skin Dose Skin dose map Radiochromic film Radiation Dose Structured Report |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
