The Effect of Contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography (CT) Scans on the Calculated Dose of Radiotherapy in a Thorax Phantom

Abstract

Background: Despite the benefits of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans in better tumor volume delineation, it can affect the accuracy of dose calculation in radiation therapy. This study examined this effect on a thorax phantom. Objectives: The influence of different variables including the concentrations of the Visipaque contrast media, tumor sizes, and CT scan energies on the dose measurement was examined. Methods: Transparent cylinders containing the contrast media were inserted in the lung area of the phantom and the CT scans were made. Non-enhanced CT scans were also acquired. Treatment planning using 2 opposite fields was performed on the CT scans and the doses were calculated in the treatment planning system. The results of the 2 sets of enhanced and non-enhanced CT scans were compared. Results: The correlation between concentration and the percentage of mean dose of the tumor volume was significant in 2 of the tumor sizes. The differences in the mean doses of the 2 plans were examined and more than 3% increase was observed in higher concentrations of the contrast media. Conclusions: According to this study, the suitable concentration of the contrast media administered and the CT scan energy should be considered. This would help to decrease the discrepancies between the calculated and delivered dose in radiotherapy treatments to a clinically acceptable level. The importance of time delays for CT scans after administration of the contrast media is emphasized.

Dosimetric effects of embolization material artefacts in arteriovenous malformations stereotactic radiosurgery on treatment planning calculation

“…Many published studies have investigated the effect of contrast agents on radiotherapy dose calculations [10][11][12][13][14][15][16], however, fewer studies investigated the influence of embolic materials. The reviewed published articles on the subject can be divided into two groups, first group acknowledged the effect and recommended dosimetric corrections [17][18][19][20].…”