SU-E-I-34: Evaluating Use of AEC to Lower Dose for Lung Cancer Screening CT Protocols

Authors

  • Arbique G,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Guild J,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Duan X,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Malguria N,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Omar H,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Zhang D,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Brewington C,

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Anderson J

    1. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    2. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    3. UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
    4. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    5. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    6. Toshiba America Medical Systems, Tustin, CA
    7. Ut Southwestern, Dallas, TX
    8. UT Southwestern Medical Ctr at Dallas, Dallas, TX
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose:

The National Lung Screening Trial mandated manual low dose CT technique factors, where up to a doubling of radiation output could be used over a regular to large patient size range. Recent guidance from the AAPM and ACR for lung cancer CT screening recommends radiation output adjustment for patient size either through AEC or a manual technique chart. This study evaluated the use of AEC for output control and dose reduction.

Methods:

The study was performed on a multidetector helical CT scanner (Aquillion ONE, Toshiba Medical) equipped with iterative reconstruction (ADIR-3D), AEC was adjusted with a standard deviation (SD) image quality noise index. The protocol SD parameter was incrementally increased to reduce patient population dose while image quality was evaluated by radiologist readers scoring the clinical utility of images on a Likert scale.

Results:

Plots of effective dose vs. body size (water cylinder diameter reported by the scanner) demonstrate monotonic increase in patient dose with increasing patient size. At the initial SD setting of 19 the average CTDIvol for a standard size patient was ∼ 2.0 mGy (1.2 mSv effective dose). This was reduced to ∼1.0 mGy (0.5 mSv) at an SD of 25 with no noticeable reduction in clinical utility of images as demonstrated by Likert scoring. Plots of effective patient diameter and BMI vs body size indicate that these metrics could also be used for manual technique charts.

Conclusion:

AEC offered consistent and reliable control of radiation output in this study. Dose for a standard size patient was reduced to one-third of the 3 mGy CTDIvol limit required for ACR accreditation of lung cancer CT screening.

Gary Arbique: Research Grant, Toshiba America Medical Systems; Cecelia Brewington: Research Grant, Toshiba America Medical Systems; Di Zhang: Employee, Toshiba America Medical Systems.

Ancillary