Joseph R. Steiner, Courtney K. Morrison, Mayur Vaya, Nicholas Bevins, Jeremy Christophel, Matt Vanderhoek
{"title":"A new method to evaluate fluoroscopic system collimator performance","authors":"Joseph R. Steiner, Courtney K. Morrison, Mayur Vaya, Nicholas Bevins, Jeremy Christophel, Matt Vanderhoek","doi":"10.1002/acm2.14536","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Fluoroscopy uses collimators to limit the radiation field size. Collimators are often evaluated annually during equipment performance evaluations to maintain compliance with regulatory and/or accreditation bodies. A method to evaluate and quantify fluoroscopy collimator performance was developed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A radiation field and displayed image measurement device consisting of radiopaque rulers and radiochromic film strips was placed on the x-ray source assembly exit window to evaluate fluoroscopy collimator performance. This method was used to evaluate collimator performance on 79 fluoroscopic imaging systems including fixed C-arms, mobile C-arms, mini C-arms, and radiographic fluoroscopic systems.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The excess length (EL), excess width (EW), and sum EL + EW of the radiation field relative to the displayed image were measured and compared to the limits specified in 21CFR1020.32. Four systems exceeded these limits. Placing the radiation measurement device at the x-ray source assembly exit window relative to the image receptor cover increased the film exposure rate by a factor up to 14.6. The time required to set up and complete the fluoroscopy collimator performance measurements using this method ranged from 5 to 10 min.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This method provides an easily implemented quantitative measure of fluoroscopy system collimator performance that satisfies regulatory and accreditation body requirements.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"25 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11633780/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.14536","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Fluoroscopy uses collimators to limit the radiation field size. Collimators are often evaluated annually during equipment performance evaluations to maintain compliance with regulatory and/or accreditation bodies. A method to evaluate and quantify fluoroscopy collimator performance was developed.
Methods
A radiation field and displayed image measurement device consisting of radiopaque rulers and radiochromic film strips was placed on the x-ray source assembly exit window to evaluate fluoroscopy collimator performance. This method was used to evaluate collimator performance on 79 fluoroscopic imaging systems including fixed C-arms, mobile C-arms, mini C-arms, and radiographic fluoroscopic systems.
Results
The excess length (EL), excess width (EW), and sum EL + EW of the radiation field relative to the displayed image were measured and compared to the limits specified in 21CFR1020.32. Four systems exceeded these limits. Placing the radiation measurement device at the x-ray source assembly exit window relative to the image receptor cover increased the film exposure rate by a factor up to 14.6. The time required to set up and complete the fluoroscopy collimator performance measurements using this method ranged from 5 to 10 min.
Conclusions
This method provides an easily implemented quantitative measure of fluoroscopy system collimator performance that satisfies regulatory and accreditation body requirements.
介绍:透视检查使用准直器来限制辐射场的大小。在设备性能评估过程中,通常每年都会对准直器进行评估,以确保其符合监管和/或认证机构的要求。我们开发了一种评估和量化透视准直仪性能的方法:方法:在 X 射线源组件出口窗上放置一个辐射场和显示图像测量装置,该装置由不透光标尺和放射性变色胶片条组成,用于评估透视准直器的性能。该方法用于评估 79 个透视成像系统的准直器性能,包括固定 C 型臂、移动 C 型臂、迷你 C 型臂和射线透视系统:结果:测量了辐射场相对于显示图像的超长(EL)、超宽(EW)和 EL + EW 之和,并与 21CFR1020.32 中规定的限值进行了比较。有四个系统超出了这些限值。将辐射测量装置放置在 X 射线源组件相对于图像接收器盖板的出口窗口处,会使胶片曝光率增加 14.6 倍。使用这种方法设置和完成透视准直仪性能测量所需的时间从 5 分钟到 10 分钟不等:该方法提供了一种易于实施的荧光透视系统准直器性能定量测量方法,可满足监管和认证机构的要求。
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic