Automated Assessment of Image Quality and Dose Attributes in Clinical CT Images

Computed tomography (CT) is a valuable technology to the healthcare enterprise as evidenced by the more than 70 million CT exams performed every year. As a result, CT has become the largest contributor to population doses amongst all medical imaging modalities that utilize man-made ionizing radiation. Acknowledging the fact that ionizing radiation poses a health risk, there exists the need to strike a balance between diagnostic benefit and radiation dose. Thus, to ensure that CT scanners are optimally used in the clinic, an understanding and characterization of image quality and radiation dose are essential.

The state-of-the-art in both image quality characterization and radiation dose estimation in CT are dependent on phantom based measurements reflective of systems and protocols. For image quality characterization, measurements are performed on inserts imbedded in static phantoms and the results are ascribed to clinical CT images. However, the key objective for image quality assessment should be its quantification in clinical images; that is the only characterization of image quality that clinically matters as it is most directly related to the actual quality of clinical images. Moreover, for dose estimation, phantom based dose metrics, such as CT dose index (CTDI) and size specific dose estimates (SSDE), are measured by the scanner and referenced as an indicator for radiation exposure. However, CTDI and SSDE are surrogates for dose, rather than dose per-se.

Currently there are several software packages that track the CTDI and SSDE associated with individual CT examinations. This is primarily the result of two causes. The first is due to bureaucracies and governments pressuring clinics and hospitals to monitor the radiation exposure to individuals in our society. The second is due to the personal concerns of patients who are curious about the health risks associated with the ionizing radiation exposure they receive as a result of their diagnostic procedures.

An idea that resonates with clinical imaging physicists is that patients come to the clinic to acquire quality images so they can receive a proper diagnosis, not to be exposed to ionizing radiation. Thus, while it is important to monitor the dose to patients undergoing CT examinations, it is equally, if not more important to monitor the image quality of the clinical images generated by the CT scanners throughout the hospital.

The purposes of the work presented in this thesis are threefold: (1) to develop and validate a fully automated technique to measure spatial resolution in clinical CT images, (2) to develop and validate a fully automated technique to measure image contrast in clinical CT images, and (3) to develop a fully automated technique to estimate radiation dose (not surrogates for dose) from a variety of clinical CT protocols.

CT Scan Dosimetric Parameters Routine Monitoring: First Results of Radiation Dose Optimization Strategies Promptly Provided by a Multidisciplinary Team

CONCLUSION Radiation dose reduction, while saving image quality could be easily implemented with this approach. Furthermore, the availability of a dosimetric data archive provides immediate feedbacks, related to the implemented optimization strategies. Background JCI Standards and European Legislation (EURATOM 59/2013) require the implementation of patient radiation protection programs in diagnostic radiology. Aim of this study is to demonstrate the possibility to reduce patients radiation exposure without decreasing image quality, through a multidisciplinary team (MT), which analyzes dosimetric data of diagnostic examinations. Evaluation Data from CT examinations performed with two different scanners (Siemens DefinitionTM and GE LightSpeed UltraTM) between November and December 2013 are considered. CT scanners are configured to automatically send images to DoseWatch© software, which is able to store output parameters (e.g. kVp, mAs, pitch ) and exposure data (e.g. CTDIvol, DLP, SSDE). Data are analyzed and discussed by a MT composed by Medical Physicists and Radiologists, to identify protocols which show critical dosimetric values, then suggest possible improvement actions to be implemented. Furthermore, the large amount of data available allows to monitor diagnostic protocols currently in use and to identify different statistic populations for each of them. Discussion We identified critical values of average CTDIvol for head and facial bones examinations (respectively 61.8 mGy, 151 scans; 61.6 mGy, 72 scans), performed with the GE LightSpeed CTTM. Statistic analysis allowed us to identify the presence of two different populations for head scan, one of which was only 10% of the total number of scans and corresponded to lower exposure values. The MT adopted this protocol as standard. Moreover, the constant output parameters monitoring allowed us to identify unusual values in facial bones exams, due to changes during maintenance service, which the team promptly suggested to correct. This resulted in a substantial dose saving in CTDIvol average values of approximately 15% and 50% for head and facial bones exams, respectively. Diagnostic image quality was deemed suitable for clinical use by radiologists.

Beam Angle Optimization for Automated Coplanar IMRT Lung Plans

Purpose: To investigate the effect of incorporating a beam spreading parameter in a beam angle optimization algorithm and to evaluate its efficacy for creating coplanar IMRT lung plans in conjunction with machine learning generated dose objectives.

Methods: Fifteen anonymized patient cases were each re-planned with ten values over the range of the beam spreading parameter, k, and analyzed with a Wilcoxon signed-rank test to determine whether any particular value resulted in significant improvement over the initially treated plan created by a trained dosimetrist. Dose constraints were generated by a machine learning algorithm and kept constant for each case across all k values. Parameters investigated for potential improvement included mean lung dose, V20 lung, V40 heart, 80% conformity index, and 90% conformity index.

Results: With a confidence level of 5%, treatment plans created with this method resulted in significantly better conformity indices. Dose coverage to the PTV was improved by an average of 12% over the initial plans. At the same time, these treatment plans showed no significant difference in mean lung dose, V20 lung, or V40 heart when compared to the initial plans; however, it should be noted that these results could be influenced by the small sample size of patient cases.

Conclusions: The beam angle optimization algorithm, with the inclusion of the beam spreading parameter k, increases the dose conformity of the automatically generated treatment plans over that of the initial plans without adversely affecting the dose to organs at risk. This parameter can be varied according to physician preference in order to control the tradeoff between dose conformity and OAR sparing without compromising the integrity of the plan.