Design of a Monte Carlo model based on dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) scanners for dose and image quality assessment using the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP5) code

[1] Kyriakou Y, Kachelrieβ M, Knaup M, et al. Impact of the z-flying focal spot on resolution and artifact behavior for a 64-slice spiral CT scanner. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(6):1206-1215.10.1007/s00330-005-0118-916541229Search in Google Scholar

[2] Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H, et al. First performance evaluation of a dual source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(2):256-268.10.1007/s00330-005-2919-216341833Search in Google Scholar

[3] Deak P, Straten M, Shrimpton P, Zankl M. Validation of a Monte Carlo tool for patient-specific dose simulations in multi-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(4):759-772.10.1007/s00330-007-0815-718066555Search in Google Scholar

[4] Long D, Lee C, Tien C, et al. Monte Carlo simulations of adult and pediatric computed tomography exams: Validation studies of organ doses with physical phantoms. Med Phys. 2013;40(1):013901.10.1118/1.4771934353770423298124Search in Google Scholar

[5] Jarry G, DeMarco J, Beifuss U, et al. A Monte Carlo-based method to estimate radiation dose from spiral CT: from phantom testing to patient-specific models. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48(16):2645-2663.10.1088/0031-9155/48/16/30612974580Search in Google Scholar

[6] Ay MR, Zaidi H. Development and validation of MCNP4C-based Monte Carlo simulator for fan- and cone-beam x-ray CT. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(20):4863-4885.10.1088/0031-9155/50/20/00916204878Search in Google Scholar

[7] Kyriakou Y, Kalender WA. Intensity distribution and impact of scatter for dual-source CT. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52(23):6969-6989.10.1088/0031-9155/52/23/01418029988Search in Google Scholar

[8] Wysocka-Rabin A, Qamhiyeh S, Jäkel O. Simulation of computed tomography (CT) images using a Monte Carlo approach. Nukleonika. 2011;56(4):299-304.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Qamhiyeh S, Wysocka-Rabin A, Jäkel O. Monte Carlo calculated CT numbers for improved heavy ion treatment planning. Nukleonika. 2014;59(1):15-23.10.2478/nuka-2014-0002Search in Google Scholar

[10] Abadi E, Harrawood B, Sharma S, et al. DukeSim: A Realistic, Rapid, and Scanner- Specific Simulation Framework in Computed Tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2019;38(6):1457-1465.10.1109/TMI.2018.2886530659843630561344Search in Google Scholar

[11] X-5 Monte Carlo Team. MCNP-a general Monte Carlo N-particle transport code. Version 5. Los Alamos: NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory; 2003.Search in Google Scholar

[12] ImPACT CT scanner evaluation group. Centre for Evidence-based Purchasing (CEP). Comparative Specifications - 64slice CT scanners, guide CEP08027, NHS PASA; March 2009.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Krauss B, Schmidt B, Flohr TG. Dual Source CT. In: Johnson TR, Fink C, Schoenberg SO, Reiser MF (eds). Dual Energy CT in Clinical Practice, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2011, pp 11-20.10.1007/174_2010_44Search in Google Scholar

[14] www.siemens-healthineers.com [Internet]. Deutschland: Siemens Healthcare; c2019 [accessed October 1, 2019]. Available from: https://www.siemens-healthineers.com.Search in Google Scholar

[15] Siemens Healthcare [Internet]. Deutschland: OEM & electronics-Siemens Helathcare; c2019 [cited 2019 Oct 12]. Available from: https://health.siemens.com/booneweb/Search in Google Scholar

[16] Primak AN, Ramirez Giraldo JC, Liu X, et al. Improved dual-energy material discrimination for dual-source CT by means of additional spectral filtration. Med Phys. 2009;36(4):1359-1369.10.1118/1.3083567271949119472643Search in Google Scholar

[17] Johnson TRC. Dual-Energy CT: General Principles. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:S3-S8.10.2214/AJR.12.911623097165Search in Google Scholar

[18] Schardt P, Deuringer J, Freudenberger J, et al. New X-ray tube performance in computed tomography by introducing the rotating envelope tube. Med Phys 2004;32(9):2699-2706.10.1118/1.178355215487753Search in Google Scholar

[19] DeMarco JJ, Cagnon CH, Cody DD, et al. A Monte Carlo based method to estimate radiation dose from multidetector CT (MDCT): cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(17):3989-4004.10.1088/0031-9155/50/17/00516177525Search in Google Scholar

[20] Kramer R, Cassola VF, Andrade ME, et al. Mathematical modeling of scanner-specific bowtie filters for Monte Carlo CT dosimetry. Phys Med Biol. 2017;62(3):781-809.10.1088/1361-6560/aa534328072578Search in Google Scholar

[21] Gu J, Bednarz B, Caracappa PF, Xu XG. The development, validation and application of a multi-detector CT (MDCT) scanner model for assessing organ doses to the pregnant patient and the fetus using Monte Carlo simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(9):2699-2717.10.1088/0031-9155/54/9/007337689319351983Search in Google Scholar

[22] Lee C, Kim KP, Long D, et al. Organ doses for reference adult male and female undergoing computed tomography estimated by Monte Carlo simulations. Med Phys. 2011;38(3):1196-1206.10.1118/1.3544658305569721520832Search in Google Scholar

[23] Herman G T. Image Reconstruction from Projections. The Fundamentals of Computerized Tomography. New York, Academic Press 1980.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Hubbell JH, Seltzer SM. 2004 Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients [Internet]. NIST: Gaithersburg, MD; c2019 [cited 2019 October 12]. Available from: https://www.nist.gov/pml/x-ray-mass-attenuation-coefficientsSearch in Google Scholar

[25] Gulliksrud K, Stokke C, Martinsen AC. How to measure CT image quality: Variations in CT-numbers, uniformity and low contrast resolution for a CT quality assurance phantom. Physica Medica. 2014;30(4):521-526.10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.01.00624530005Search in Google Scholar

[26] Sharma DS, Sharma SD, Sanu KK, et al. Performance evaluation of a dedicated computed tomography scanner used for virtual simulation using in-house fabricated CT phantoms. J Med Phys 2006;31(1):28-35.10.4103/0971-6203.25667300389121206637Search in Google Scholar