Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Dose and Image Quality according to Center Location in Lumbar Spine Lateral Radiography Using AEC Mode

자동노출제어장치를 이용한 요추 측면 방사선검사 시 환자 중심 위치 변화가 선량과 화질에 미치는 영향

  • 정운찬 (삼성서울병원 영상의학과) ;
  • 주영철 (삼성서울병원 영상의학과)
  • Received : 2021.04.02
  • Accepted : 2021.04.26
  • Published : 2021.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to consider usefulness of using AEC mode and importance of patient center location in L-spine lateral radiography by comparing dose and image quality according to the change of patient center location with using AEC mode or not. In this study, guide wire is attached to the human body phantom's lumbar spine and the lead ruler is attached to the bottom of the wall detector to find out center location in detector. ESD, mAs, and EI were selected as dose factors, and image quality was compared through SNR. With the lumbar spine located center of the detector, dose factors and image quality were compared according to using AEC mode or not. Afterwards, phantom moved 4 cm and 8 cm back and forth and compared dose factors and image quality. The exposure parameters were 85 kVp, 320 mA, x-ray field size 10×17 inch, and the distance between the center X-ray and the detector was fixed at 100 cm. The center X-ray was perpendicular to the fourth lumbar spine and the only bottom AEC chamber was used. All data were analyzed by independent t-test and ANOVA. As a result of this study, with AEC when the center is matched, ESD was 1.31±0.01 mGy, without AEC was 2.12±0.01 mGy. SNR was shown to be 22.81±1.83, and 23.44±1.87 respectively. When the phantom's center moves 4 cm, 8 cm forward, and 4 cm, 8 cm backward, ESD were 1.09±0.004 mGy, 0.32±0.003 mGy, 1.19±0.017 mGy, 1.11±0.006 mGy respectively, SNR were 18.29±0.60 dB, 11.11±0.22 dB, 18.98±0.80 dB, 17.71±0.82 dB. Using AEC in L-spine lateral radiography reduced ESD by 38%, EI by 35%, and mAs by 38%, without any difference in SNR(p<0.05). When the phantom's center moves 4 cm, 8 cm forward, and 4 cm, 8 cm backward, ESD was decreasing each 16%, 75%, 9%, 15%, EI was decreasing each 14%, 77%, 15%, 20%, mAs was decreasing each 15% 75% 9%, 15%. SNR was decreasing each 19%, 51%, 17%, 22%.

Keywords

References

  1. Andersson GBJ. Epidemiology of low back pain. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica. 1998;Sup281:28-31.
  2. Ko HY, Kim JS, Sung DH, Chung SG, Choi KH, Park YG, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. A Clinical Practice Guideline from Korean Association of Pain Medicine. 2011;10(1):1-37.
  3. Wang JH, Han SY, Kim HS, Park SM, Lee SY, Back SM, et al. Guidelines for patient dose recommendation in abdominal, pelvic and lumbar radiology (Civil Guide). Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. 2011:88-93.
  4. Kim JK, Kim JK. Evaluation on organ dose and image quality of lumbar spine radiography using glass dosimeter. Korean Society of Radiological Science. 2016;39(1):1-11.
  5. ICRP. The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP. 2007;37(2-4).
  6. Ullman G, Sandborg M, Dance DR, Hunt R, Carlsson GA. The influence of patient thickness and imaging system on patient dose and physical image quality in digital chest imaging. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):294-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/nch542
  7. Kim KT. A study of sensor for automatic exposure control system for minimization of dose creep [master's thesis]. Kimhae: The Dept. of Health Science and Technology, Inje University; 2015.
  8. Kwon SM, Park CH, Park JG, Son WH, Jung JE. The effect of Source to Image-Receptor Distance(SID) on radiation dose for digital chest radiography. The Korean Society of Radiology. 2014;8(4):203-10. https://doi.org/10.7742/jksr.2014.8.4.203
  9. Kim SK, Kim HS, Jung SS. Degrees of low back pain, knowledge of and educational needs for low back pain in patients with chronic low back pain. J Muscles Jt Health. 2017;24(1):55-65.
  10. Jung EK, Park O, Lee HK, Lee BY, Lee JE, Gil JW, et al. Diagnostic reference level guidelines-General radiography. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. 2019:27-45.
  11. Kim YH, Choi JH, Kim SS, Lee CH, Cho PK, Lee YB et al. A Study on the Utilization of Diagnostic Equipments and Patient Dose for Diagnostic Radiological Procedures in Korea. Korean journal of medical physics. 2005;Vol.16 Issue 1:10-5.
  12. Kim KW, Kwon YR, Seo SW, Kwon KT, Oh JY, Son SY, et al. Comparison of exposure dose by using AEC mode of abdomen AP study in radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(3):205-11. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.3.03
  13. Jung JS, Choi BW, Kim SH, Kim YM, Shim JN, Ahn HS, et al. Effect of automatic exposure control marker with chest radiography in radiation reduction. Korean Society of Radiological Science. 2014;37(3):177-85.
  14. Chung YH, Kwon SA, Jeong SH. Usefulness of auto exposure control mode in digital flat-panel system for reduction of dose area product: Phantom study of the lumbar spine. European Society of Radiology [Internet]. 2011.
  15. Chung HB. Analysis of AEC dose according to BMI and Body size in Abdomen X ray [master's thesis]. Sungnam: The Dept. of Radiological Science, Graduate School of Public Health, Eulji University; 2017.