Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

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

DOI QR Code

Proposal of CT Simulator Quality Assurance Items

전산화단층 모의치료장치의 정도관리 항목 제안

  • Kim, Yon-Lae (Department of Radiologic Technology, Choonhae College of Health Science) ;
  • Yoon, Young-Woo (Department of Radiologic Technology, Choonhae College of Health Science) ;
  • Jung, Jae-Yong (Department of Radiation Oncology, Sanggye Paik Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Jeong-Woo (Department of Radiation Oncology, Konkuk University Hospital) ;
  • Chung, Jin-Beom (Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • 김연래 (춘해보건대학교 방사선과) ;
  • 윤영우 (춘해보건대학교 방사선과) ;
  • 정재용 (상계백병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 이정우 (건국대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 정진범 (분당서울대학교병원 방사선종양학과)
  • Received : 2021.07.22
  • Accepted : 2021.08.19
  • Published : 2021.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A quality assurance of computed tomography(CT) have done seven items that were water attenuation coefficient, noise, homogeneity, spatial resolution, contrast resolution, slice thickness, artifact using by standard phantom. But there is no quality assurance items and methods for CT simulator at domestic institutions yet. Therefore the study aimed to access the CT dose index(CTDI), table tilting, image distortion, laser accuracy, table movement accuracy and CT seven items for CT simulator quality assurance. The CTDI at the center of the head phantom was 0.81 for 80 kVp, 1.55 for 100 kVp, 2.50 for 120 mm, 0.22 for 80 kVp at the center of the body phantom, 0.469 for 100 kVp, and 0.81 for 120 kVp. The table tilting was within the tolerance range of ±1.0° or less. Image distortion had 1 mm distortion in the left and right images based on the center, and the laser accuracy was measured within ±2 mm tolerance. The purpose of this study is to improve the quality assurance items suitable for the current situation in Korea in order to protect the normal tissues during the radiation treatment process and manage the CT simulator that is implemented to find the location of the tumor more clearly. In order to improve the accuracy of the CT simulator when looking at the results, the error range of each item should be small. It is hoped that the quality assurance items of the CT simulator will be improved by suggesting the quality assurance direction of the CT simulator in this study, and the results of radiation therapy will also improve.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by Choonhae College of Health Sciences(2021 year)

References

  1. Kim JW, Lee JK, Lee MS, Shin DO, Kim YH, Park SY. Acceptance test and quality control of radiotherapy treatment simulator. Journal of Korean Medical Physics. 2002;13(2):90-7.
  2. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Rules for the installation and operation of special medical equipment. 2019.
  3. Sasa M, Jatinder RP, Elizabeth KB, Indra JD, Saiful H, Leh-Nien DL, et al. Quality assurance for computed-tomography simulators and the computed tomography-simulation process: Report of the AAPM radiation therapy committee task group No. 66. American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2005.
  4. Philippe D, Stewart G. COMP report: CPQR technical quality control guidelines for CT simulators. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19(2):12-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12213
  5. Zakaria GA. Quality assurance in radiotherapy: Simulators, cone beam CT, EPID and immobilization devices. Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Cologne; 2012.
  6. Kim YK, Kim YM. Comparison of estimated and measured doses of dual-energy computed tomography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2018;41(5):405-11. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2018.41.5.405
  7. Hwang SH, Min JS, Lee JH, Park HD. Efficiency evaluation of CT simulator QA phantom. The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy. 2009;21(2):89-95.
  8. Min CK, Yi BY, Ahn SD, Choi EK, Chang HS. A CT simulator phantom for geometrical test. The Journal of the Korean Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. 2000;18(4):329-36.
  9. Huaiqun G, Rabin H, Yin FF. A positioning QA procedure of 2D/2D(kV/MV) and 3D/3D(CT/CBCT) image matching for radiotherapy patient setup. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2009;10(4):273-80. https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i4.2954
  10. Tomic N, Aldelaijan S, Rajala J, Seuntjens J, Devic S. Image quality of radiotherapy CT simulator with different scanner bore size. Physica Medica. 2018;45:65-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.11.017
  11. Li XN, Wang D, Li GF, Xiao SH. Quality assurance on accuracy of the external laser centre in CT simulator. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology. 2006;(6):481-3.
  12. Ku EW, Lee JS, Cho JK, Moon SK. An efficient correction process of CT-simulator couch with current diagnostic CT scanners. The Journal of Korea Contents Association. 2009;9(11):254-61. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.11.254
  13. An HJ, Son JM, Jin HM, Sung JW, Chun MS. Acceptance Test and Clinical Commissioning of CT Simulator. Progress in Medical Physics. 2019;0(4):160-166
  14. Ku EW, Lee JS, Cho JK, Moon SK. An Efficient Correction Process of CT-Simulator Couch with Current Diagnostic CT Scanners. The Journal of Korea Contents Association. 2009;9(11):254-261. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.11.254
  15. Yoon MS, Hong SM, Heo YC, Han DK. Computed Tomography, Quality assurance, Image qulality, AAPM CT phantom, 3D printer. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2018;41(6):595-602. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2018.41.6.595