Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng

Background and Aims: The evaluation of absorbed dose received by patients could give useful information for radiation risk estimation. This study was performed to compare the entrance skin dose received by patients in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), conventional and spiral computed tomography...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rahimi A, Rostampour N, Eskandarlou A, Ghazi Khanlou Sani K
Format: Article
Language:fas
Published: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2011-12-01
Series:Journal of Dental Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/19312.pdf
id doaj-261d40455eda4d0f8a78d2a29a0ff5c5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-261d40455eda4d0f8a78d2a29a0ff5c52020-11-24T23:34:57ZfasTehran University of Medical SciencesJournal of Dental Medicine1024-641X2008-24442011-12-01243181187Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography ScanninngRahimi ARostampour NEskandarlou AGhazi Khanlou Sani KBackground and Aims: The evaluation of absorbed dose received by patients could give useful information for radiation risk estimation. This study was performed to compare the entrance skin dose received by patients in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), conventional and spiral computed tomography (CT).Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, 81 calibrated TLD chips were used. the TLD chips were placed on facial, thyroid and end of sternum skin surface in patients referred for CT of the paranasal sinuses(3 TLD chips for each area) to estimate the absorbed dose received by central part of radiation field, thyroid and out of field areas, respectively. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results: The dose delivered to the center of irradiated field was about 0.79±0.09 mGy in CBCT technique compared with 16.31±3.71 and 18.84±4.12 mGy for spiral and conventional CT, respectively. The received dose by the out of field areas was about 54 percent of central area dose. There was statistical significant relationship between the imaging modalities and absorbed dose received by patients (P=0.016). The least absorbed dose was for CBCT and the greatest dose was for conventional CT imaging technique.Conclusion: The dose delivered to central area of irradiated field in conventional and spiral CT imaging modalities was about 24 times greater than of that in CBCT. Also, the highest received dose was for central area of radiated field and the lowest dose was for the out of field areas.http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/19312.pdfAbsorbed DoseCone Beam CTSpiral CTDosimetry
collection DOAJ
language fas
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rahimi A
Rostampour N
Eskandarlou A
Ghazi Khanlou Sani K
spellingShingle Rahimi A
Rostampour N
Eskandarlou A
Ghazi Khanlou Sani K
Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
Journal of Dental Medicine
Absorbed Dose
Cone Beam CT
Spiral CT
Dosimetry
author_facet Rahimi A
Rostampour N
Eskandarlou A
Ghazi Khanlou Sani K
author_sort Rahimi A
title Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
title_short Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
title_full Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
title_fullStr Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Adsorbed Skin Dose Received by Patients in Cone Beam Computed Tomography, Spiral and Conventional Computed Tomography Scanninng
title_sort comparison of adsorbed skin dose received by patients in cone beam computed tomography, spiral and conventional computed tomography scanninng
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
series Journal of Dental Medicine
issn 1024-641X
2008-2444
publishDate 2011-12-01
description Background and Aims: The evaluation of absorbed dose received by patients could give useful information for radiation risk estimation. This study was performed to compare the entrance skin dose received by patients in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), conventional and spiral computed tomography (CT).Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, 81 calibrated TLD chips were used. the TLD chips were placed on facial, thyroid and end of sternum skin surface in patients referred for CT of the paranasal sinuses(3 TLD chips for each area) to estimate the absorbed dose received by central part of radiation field, thyroid and out of field areas, respectively. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results: The dose delivered to the center of irradiated field was about 0.79±0.09 mGy in CBCT technique compared with 16.31±3.71 and 18.84±4.12 mGy for spiral and conventional CT, respectively. The received dose by the out of field areas was about 54 percent of central area dose. There was statistical significant relationship between the imaging modalities and absorbed dose received by patients (P=0.016). The least absorbed dose was for CBCT and the greatest dose was for conventional CT imaging technique.Conclusion: The dose delivered to central area of irradiated field in conventional and spiral CT imaging modalities was about 24 times greater than of that in CBCT. Also, the highest received dose was for central area of radiated field and the lowest dose was for the out of field areas.
topic Absorbed Dose
Cone Beam CT
Spiral CT
Dosimetry
url http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/19312.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT rahimia comparisonofadsorbedskindosereceivedbypatientsinconebeamcomputedtomographyspiralandconventionalcomputedtomographyscanninng
AT rostampourn comparisonofadsorbedskindosereceivedbypatientsinconebeamcomputedtomographyspiralandconventionalcomputedtomographyscanninng
AT eskandarloua comparisonofadsorbedskindosereceivedbypatientsinconebeamcomputedtomographyspiralandconventionalcomputedtomographyscanninng
AT ghazikhanlousanik comparisonofadsorbedskindosereceivedbypatientsinconebeamcomputedtomographyspiralandconventionalcomputedtomographyscanninng
_version_ 1725526917404164096