Monte Carlo calculated CT numbers for improved heavy ion treatment planning

Qamhiyeh, Sima; Wysocka-Rabin, Anna; Jäkel, Oliver

doi:10.2478/nuka-2014-0002

Abstract

Better knowledge of CT number values and their uncertainties can be applied to improve heavy ion treatment planning. We developed a novel method to calculate CT numbers for a computed tomography (CT) scanner using the Monte Carlo (MC) code, BEAMnrc/EGSnrc. To generate the initial beam shape and spectra we conducted full simulations of an X-ray tube, filters and beam shapers for a Siemens Emotion CT. The simulation output files were analyzed to calculate projections of a phantom with inserts. A simple reconstruction algorithm (FBP using a Ram-Lak filter) was applied to calculate the pixel values, which represent an attenuation coefficient, normalized in such a way to give zero for water (Hounsfield unit (HU)). Measured and Monte Carlo calculated CT numbers were compared. The average deviation between measured and simulated CT numbers was 4 ± 4 HU and the standard deviation σ was 49 ± 4 HU. The simulation also correctly predicted the behaviour of H-materials compared to a Gammex tissue substitutes. We believe the developed approach represents a useful new tool for evaluating the effect of CT scanner and phantom parameters on CT number values.

References

1. Mustafa, A. A., & Jackson, D. F. (1983). The relation between X-ray CT numbers and charged particle stopping powers and its significance for radiotherapy treatment planning. Phys. Med. Biol., 28, 169-176.10.1088/0031-9155/28/2/0066408654
Search in Google Scholar
2. Verhaegen, F., & Devic, S. (2005). Sensitivity study for CT images in Monte Carlo treatment planning. Phys. Med.Biol., 50, 937-946.10.1088/0031-9155/50/5/01615798266
Search in Google Scholar
3. Homolka, P., Gahleitner, A., & Nowotny, R. (2002).Temperature dependence of HU values for various water equivalent phantom materials. Phys. Med. Biol., 47, 2917-2923.10.1088/0031-9155/47/16/30712222855
Search in Google Scholar
4. Bhat, M., Pattison, J., Bibbo, G., & Caon, M. (1998).Diagnostic X-ray spectra: a comparison of spectra generated by different computational methods with a measured spectrum. Med. Phys., 25, 114-120.10.1118/1.5981709472833
Search in Google Scholar
5. Caon, M., Bibbo, G., Pattison, J., & Bhat, M. (1998). The effect on dose to computed tomography phantoms of varying the theoretical X-ray spectrum: a comparison of four diagnostic spectrum calculating codes. Med. Phys., 25, 1021-1027.10.1118/1.5982819650192
Search in Google Scholar
6. Ay, M. R., Sarkar, S., Shahriari, M., & Zaidi, H. (2005).Assessment of different computational models for generation of X-ray spectra in diagnostic radiology and mammography. Med. Phys., 32, 1660-1675.10.1118/1.190612616013725
Search in Google Scholar
7. Ay, M. R., Shahriari, M., Sarkar, S., & Zaidi, H. (2004).Monte Carlo simulation of X-ray spectra in diagnostic radiology and mammography using MCNP4C. Phys. Med.Biol., 49, 4897-4917.10.1088/0031-9155/49/21/00415584526
Search in Google Scholar
8. Atherton, J. V., & Huda, W. (1995). CT dose in cylindrical phantoms. Phys. Med. Biol., 40, 891-911.10.1088/0031-9155/40/5/0127652014
Search in Google Scholar
9. Jarry, G., DeMacro, J. J., Beifuss, U., & Cagnon, C. H. (2003). A Monte Carlo-based method to estimate radiation dose from spiral CT: from phantom testing to patient- -specific models. Phys. Med. Biol., 48, 2645-2663.10.1088/0031-9155/48/16/30612974580
Search in Google Scholar
10. Salvado, M., Lopez, M., Morant, J. J., & Calzado, A. (2005). Monte Carlo calculations of radiation dose in CT examination using phantom and patient tomographic models. Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 114, 364-368.10.1093/rpd/nch51615933138
Search in Google Scholar
11. Tzedakis, A., & Perisnakis, K. (2006). The effect of Z overscanning on radiation burden of pediatric patients undergoing head CT with multidetector scanners: A Monte Carlo study. Med. Phys., 33(7), 2472-2478.10.1118/1.220721216898450
Search in Google Scholar
12. Wysocka-Rabin, A., Qamhiyeh, S., & Jäkel, O. (2011).Simulation of computed tomography (CT) images using a Monte Carlo approach. Nukleonika, 56(4), 299-304.
Search in Google Scholar
13. Heismann, B. J., Leppert, J., & Stierstorfer, K. (2003).Density and atomic number measurements with spectral X-ray attenuation method. J. Appl. Phys., 94, 2073-2079.10.1063/1.1586963
Search in Google Scholar
14. Gammex-RMI. (2004). Electron density CT phantom.Catalogue. Retrieved from http://www.gammex.com/ace-files/Gammex_Catalog.pdf.
Search in Google Scholar
15. Jäkel, O., Jacob, C., Schardt, D., Karger, C., & Hartmann, G. H. (2001). Relation between carbon ion ranges and X-ray CT numbers. Med. Phys., 28(4), 701-703.10.1118/1.135745511339768
Search in Google Scholar
16. Kawrakow, I. (2000). Accurate condensed history Monte Carlo simulation of electron transport. EGSnrc, the new EGS4 version. Med. Phys., 27, 485-498.10.1118/1.59891710757601
Search in Google Scholar
17. Kawrakow, I., & Rogers, D. W. O. (2003). The EGSnrc cod system: Monte Carlo simulation of electron and photon transports. Ottawa: National Research Council of Canada. (PRIS-701).
Search in Google Scholar
18. Rogers, D. W. O., Ma, C. M., Walters, B., Ding, G. X., Sheikh-Bagheri, D., & Zhang, G. (2001). BEAMnrc Users manual. Ottawa: National Research Council of Canada. (PRIS-0509(A) rev. G).
Search in Google Scholar
19. Verhaegen, F. (2002). Evaluation of the EGSnrc Monte Carlo code for interference near high-Z media exposed to kilovolt and 60Co photons. Phys. Med. Biol., 47, 1691-1705.10.1088/0031-9155/47/10/30612069087
Search in Google Scholar
20. Verhaegen, F., Nahum, A. E., Van de Putte, S., & Namito, Y. (1999). Monte Carlo modelling of radiotherapy kV X-ray units. Phys. Med. Biol., 44, 1767-1789.10.1088/0031-9155/44/7/31510442712
Search in Google Scholar
21. Romanchikova, M. (2006). Monte Carlo Simulation des Röntgenspektrums einer computertomographischen Röntgenröhre. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Search in Google Scholar
22. Qamhiyeh, S. (2007). A Monte Carlo study of the accuracy of CT numbers for range calculations in Carbon ion therapy. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Search in Google Scholar
23. Kachelrieß, M., & Kalender, W. (2005). Improving PET/ CT attenuation correction with iterative CT beam hardening corrections. In 2005 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 23-29 October 2005. (Vol. 4).IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/NSSMIC.2005.1596704.10.1109/NSSMIC.2005.1596704
Search in Google Scholar
24. Kachelrieß, M., Sourbelle, K., & Kalender, W. (2006). Empirical cupping corrections: a first-order raw data precorrection for cone beam computed tomography. Phys. Med.Biol., 33, 1269-1274.10.1118/1.218807616752561
Search in Google Scholar
25. Sennst, D. A., Kachelriess, M., Leidercker, C., Schmidt, B., Watzke, O., & Kalender, W. A. (2004). An extensible software-based platform for reconstruction and evaluation of CT images. Radiographics, 24(2), 601-613.10.1148/rg.24203511915026605
Search in Google Scholar
26. Ay, M. R., & Zaidi, H. (2005). Development and validation of MCNP4C-based Monte Carlo simulator for fan and cone beam X-ray CT. Phys. Med. Biol., 50, 4863-3885.10.1088/0031-9155/50/20/00916204878
Search in Google Scholar
27. Qamhiyeh, S., Wysocka-Rabin, A., Ellerbrock, M., & Jäkel, O. (2007). Effect of voltage of CT scanner, phantom size and phantom material on CT calibration and carbon range.Radiother. Oncol., 84(S1), S232.
Search in Google Scholar
28. Bazalova, M., Carrier, J. F., Beaulieu, L., & Verhaegen, F. (2008). Tissue segmentation in Monte Carlo treatment planning: a simulation study using dual-energy CT images.Radiother. Oncol., 86(1), 93-98.10.1016/j.radonc.2007.11.00818068841
Search in Google Scholar
29. Hünemohr, N., Krauss, B., Dinkel, J., Gillmann, C., Ackermann, B., Jäkel, O., & Greilich, S. (2013). Ion range estimation by using dual energy computed tomography. Z. Med. Phys., 23(4), 300-313.10.1016/j.zemedi.2013.03.00123597413
Search in Google Scholar
30. Wysocka-Rabin, A. (2013) Advances in conformal radiotherapy using Monte Carlo Code to design new IMRT and IORT Accelerators and interpret CT numbers. (CERN- -WUT Editorial series on “Accelerator Science”. Vol. 17). Warsaw: Institute of Electronic Systems, Warsaw University of Technology.
Search in Google Scholar

Monte Carlo calculated CT numbers for improved heavy ion treatment planning

Abstract

Paradigm

My account