Analysis of material composition and attenuation characteristics of anthropomorphic torso phantoms for dosimetry using dual energy CT technology
- PMID: 40100568
- DOI: 10.1007/s13246-025-01533-1
Analysis of material composition and attenuation characteristics of anthropomorphic torso phantoms for dosimetry using dual energy CT technology
Abstract
Anthropomorphic phantoms are often used to estimate organ absorbed doses. However, the material composition of these phantoms is not identical to that of the human body, which may cause errors in the measurement results. The purpose of this study was to analyze the material composition of several anthropomorphic torso phantoms using dual energy computed tomography (DECT), and to clarify the differences in attenuation characteristics among the phantoms. Anthropomorphic torso phantoms (ATOM, RANDO, and PBU-60) from different manufacturers were scanned with DECT. The target organs were lung, soft tissue, liver, bone, and bone surface, and a spectral Hounsfield unit curve (HU curve) was created from the relationship between energy and CT values. Ideal CT values were estimated from the mass attenuation coefficient and density proposed by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements report 44 (ideal value) and compared with the values of each phantom. There were large differences in attenuation characteristics among the phantoms for soft tissue, liver, and bone. The respective ideal, ATOM, RANDO, and PBU-60 CT values of soft tissue were 59.82, 14.17, 34.22, and - 70.11 at 45 keV; and 53.13, 24.41, 3.97, and - 5.75 at 70 keV. The phantom closest to the ideal value may differ depending on the energy. Differences in HU curve and CT values indicate that some organs in the phantom have different material composition and attenuation characteristics to human tissues. When the phantoms available for dosimetry are limited, it is important to understand the attenuation characteristics of each phantom used.
Keywords: Anthropomorphic phantom; Dosimetry; Dual energy computed tomography; Human body equivalent phantom; Radiological protection; Spectral hounsfield unit curve.
© 2025. Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Competing interests: All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. Informed consent: No informed consent was required as this phantom study used no patient data.
Similar articles
-
Liver fat volume fraction assessment in medium and large anthropomorphic phantoms-dual energy virtual monochromatic imaging versus single-energy CT.Med Phys. 2025 Sep;52(9):e18105. doi: 10.1002/mp.18105. Med Phys. 2025. PMID: 40903986
-
Reproduction of a conventional anthropomorphic female chest phantom by 3D-printing: Comparison of image contrasts and absorbed doses in CT.Med Phys. 2023 Aug;50(8):4734-4743. doi: 10.1002/mp.16587. Epub 2023 Jul 6. Med Phys. 2023. PMID: 37415411
-
Photon-Counting Detector CT for Liver Lesion Detection-Optimal Virtual Monoenergetic Energy for Different Simulated Patient Sizes and Radiation Doses.Invest Radiol. 2024 Aug 1;59(8):554-560. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000001060. Epub 2024 Jan 3. Invest Radiol. 2024. PMID: 38193782
-
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel, docetaxel, gemcitabine and vinorelbine in non-small-cell lung cancer.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195. doi: 10.3310/hta5320. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 12065068
-
Cost-effectiveness of using prognostic information to select women with breast cancer for adjuvant systemic therapy.Health Technol Assess. 2006 Sep;10(34):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-204. doi: 10.3310/hta10340. Health Technol Assess. 2006. PMID: 16959170
References
-
- Martin CJ, Harrison JD, Rehani MM (2020) Effective dose from radiation exposure in medicine: past, present, and future. Phys Med 79:87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.10.020 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Asada Y, Kondo Y, Kobayashi M, Kobayashi K, Ichikawa T, Matsunaga Y (2020) Proposed diagnostic reference levels for general radiography and mammography in Japan. J Radiol Prot 40:867–876. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/aba083 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Matsunaga Y, Chida K, Kondo Y, Kobayashi K, Kobayashi M, Minami K, Suzuki S, Asada Y (2019) Diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for common computed tomography examinations: results from the Japanese nationwide dose survey. Br J Radiol 91:20180290. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180290 - DOI
-
- Lee KL, Beveridge T, Sanagou M, Thomas P (2020) Updated Australian diagnostic reference levels for adult CT. J Med Radiat Sci 67:5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.372 - DOI - PubMed - PMC