• Login
    View Item 
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • UMB Open Access Articles
    • UMB Open Access Articles 2018
    • View Item
    •   UMB Digital Archive
    • UMB Open Access Articles
    • UMB Open Access Articles 2018
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UMB Digital ArchiveCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Evaluation of computed tomography scanners for feasibility of using averaged hounsfield unit-to-stopping power ratio calibration curve

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Author
    Chung, Heeteak
    Mossahebi, Sina
    Gopal, Arun
    Lasio, Giovanni
    Xu, Huijun
    Polf, Jerimy
    Date
    2018-07-23
    Journal
    International Journal of Particle Therapy
    Publisher
    Allen Press
    Type
    Article
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    See at
    https://dx.doi.org/10.14338/IJPT-17-0035.1
    Abstract
    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to quantify the variability of stoichiometric calibration curves for different computed tomography (CT) scanners and determine whether an averaged Hounsfield unit (HU)-to-stopping power ratio (SPR) calibration curve can be used across multiple CT scanners. Materials and Methods: Five CT scanners were used to scan an electron density phantom to establish HU values of known material plugs. A stoichiometric calibration curve was calculated for CT scanners and for the average curve. Animal tissue surrogates were used to compare the water-equivalent thickness (WET) of the animal tissue surrogates calculated by the treatment planning system (TPS) and the WET values measured with a multilayered ionization chamber. The calibration curves were optimized to reduce the percentage of difference between measured and TPS-calculated WET values. A second set of tissue surrogates was then used to evaluate the overall range of uncertainty for the optimized CT-specific and average calibration curves. Results: Overall, the average variation in HU for all 6 calibration curves before optimization was 8.3 HU. For both the averaged and CT-specific calibrations, the root mean square error (RMSE) of the percentage of difference between TPS-calculated and measured WET values before optimization was 4%. The RMSE of the percentage of difference for the TPS-calculated and multilayered ionization chamber measured WET values after the optimization for both averaged and CT-specific calibration curves was reduced to less than 1.5%. The overall RMSE of the TPS and the measured WET percentage of difference after optimization was 2.1% for both averaged and CT-specific calibration curves. Conclusion: Averaged CT calibration curves can be used to map the HU-to-SPR in TPSs, if the variations in HU values across all scanners is relatively small. Performing tissue surrogate optimization of the HU-to-SPR calibration curve has been shown to reduce the overall uncertainty of the calibration for averaged and CT-specific calibration curves and is recommended, especially if an averaged HU-to-SPR calibration curve is used. © 2018 International Journal of Particle Therapy.
    Keyword
    animal tissue surrogate
    stoichiometric calibration
    water-equivalent thickness
    Identifier to cite or link to this item
    https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85065056924&origin=inward; http://hdl.handle.net/10713/9017
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.14338/IJPT-17-0035.1
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    UMB Open Access Articles 2018

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Policies | Contact Us | UMB Health Sciences & Human Services Library
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.