• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.369-378
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to investigate image differences between KVCT vs MVCT depending on a high densities metal included in the phantom and to analyze the r values for the purpose of the dose differences between each methods. We verified the possibilities for clinical indications that using MVCT is available for the radiation therapy treatment planning. Cheese phantom was used to get a density table for each CT and CT sinogram data was transferred to radiation planning computer through DICOM_RT. Using this data, the treatment dose plan has been calculated in RTP system. We compared the differences of r values between calculated and measured values, and then applied this data to the real patient's treatment planning. The contrast of MVCT image was superior to KVCT. In KVCT, each pixel which has more than 3.0 of density was difficult to be differentiated, but in MVCT, more than 5.0 density of pixels were distinguished clearly. With the normal phantom, the percentage of the case which has less than 1($r\leq1$, acceptable criteria) of gamma value, was 94.92% for KVCT and 93.87% for MVCT. But with the cheese phantom, which has high density plug, the percentage was 88.25% for KVCT and 93.77% for MVCT respectively. MVCT has many advantages than KVCT. Especially, when the patient has high density metal, such as total hip arthroplasty, MVCT is more efficient to define the anatomical structure around the high density implants without any artifacts. MVCT helps to calculate the treatment dose more accurately.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.38 no.5
• /
• pp.559-566
• /
• 2011

Purpose: The use of tissue expander/implant in breast reconstruction using tissue expander-implant is one of the most common surgical procedures. The use of AlloDerm as a sling to reestablish the lower pole of the pectoralis major muscle results a decrease in morbidity compared with more invasive procedures. However the use of AlloDerm is more expensive than other options. We decided to compare AlloDerm with Permacol, which has been safely used in human body reconstruction and is less costly than AlloDerm. Methods: After mastectomy, the inferolateral origin of the pectoralis major muscle was elevated. Either AlloDerm or Permacol was sutured to the chest wall at the level of the previously marked inframammary fold. The lower border of the pectoralis major muscle and the upper portion of the crescent-shaped piece of either AlloDerm or Permacol was sutured together using a tension free technique, and a tissue expander was subsequently inserted into the subpectoral-subAlloDerm (or Permacol) dual pocket. Results: AlloDerm was used in twenty-one patients (28 breasts) and Permacol was used in six patients (11 breasts) for tissue expander-implant breast reconstruction. During the mean follow-up period of 17 months (8~25 months). Two infections (7%) occurred in AlloDerm cases and four infections (36%) occurred in Permacol cases. Conclusion: This study is the first comparison of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction using AlloDerm and Permacol. The use of Permacol resulted in more postoperative infection compared with the use of AlloDerm. This report is still limited with the small number of cases studied.