Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007 https://doi.org/10.

1088/2057-1976/ac8e71

PAPER

Evaluation of computed tomography dose profiler probe for

RECEIVED
12 June 2022
computed tomography dose index and geometric efficiency
REVISED
22 August 2022
measurements
ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
1 September 2022
PUBLISHED
Philomina Akhilesh∗ , M S Pathan and S D Sharma
13 September 2022 Radiological Physics and Advisory Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400085, India
∗
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: pmina@barc.gov.in

Keywords: CT dose profiler, solid state sensor, CTDI100 metric, geometric efficiency, radiochromic film
Supplementary material for this article is available online

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of solid-state sensor based computed
tomography dose profiler (CTDP) probe for measurement of standard computed tomography dose
metric CTDI100 and free in air geometric efficiency for various beam widths available in a 128-slice CT
scanner and also to estimate the efficiency of CTDI100 metric. The response accuracy of CTDP probe
was verified using a standard 100 mm long ionization chamber. The geometric efficiency
measurements performed by the CTDP probe were validated using XR-QA2 radiochromic film
measurements. The efficiency of CTDI100 metric was assessed by calculating the ratio of CTDI100
measured in the center hole position to CTDI∞ measured in the same position of both head and body
phantoms. The weighted CTDI values derived from CTDI100 measured by the CTDP probe showed an
average difference of 8% from ionization chamber measured values. The efficiency of CTDI100 metric
estimated using CTDP probe and 150 mm long phantoms was in the range of 82% to 86% and 76% to
80% for head and body phantom measurements respectively. The differences in the geometric
efficiency values for various beam settings and tube voltages measured by the CTDP probe and films
were within 7%. Taken together, the results of this study proved that unlike the 100 mm long
ionization chamber, the CTDP probe can be efficiently used to determine CTDI for any length over
which dose integration is desired and also measure geometric efficiency of MDCT scanners for various
beam widths in helical mode of operation.

1. Introduction CT since the 1980s [4]. Under certain conditions, the

Computed Tomography (CT) scan examinations are
considered to be relatively high dose diagnostic
procedures. The amount of dose delivered in typical
CT scan examinations ranges from 1 to 14 mSv which
is about two orders higher in magnitude compared to
the dose in conventional radiography examinations
[1]. Due to the rapid increase in the frequency of CT
scans and patient dose concerns, there is a need to
improve the accuracy of radiation dose assessment in
CT examinations. The computed tomography dose
index (CTDI), originally proposed by Kambic et al [2]
and established by Shope et al [3], has served as a
standard measure of radiation dose to phantom from
CTDI values are used to assess the dose received by
patients [5].
CTDI is defined as the integral of dose profile
along the z-axis acquired in a single axial scan normal-
ized to beam width. The integration limits for CTDI
are ±50 mm which corresponds to the length (100
mm) of the ionisation chamber used for the measure-
ment and the quantity measured is the standard CT
dose descriptor CTDI100. CT scanner technology has
advanced at a very rapid pace leading to the present
day multi-detector CT (MDCT) scanners with nom-
inal beam widths of 40 mm or more (up to 160 mm)
[6]. However, CT dose metrics and methodology of
CT scanner output measurement have had few

© 2022 IOP Publishing Ltd

Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007
changes to meet the requirements of new and
advanced capabilities of current day CT scanner. A
major drawback of 100 mm long ionisation chamber
measurements based CTDI100 metric is its inability to
measure scatter dose tails that extend beyond the stan-
dard 100 mm integration limits [5]. Another drawback
is its inability to provide information about dose dis-
tribution along z-axis and the amount of radiation that
goes beyond active detector arrays [7].
Alternative methods of CTDI measurements
include a linear array of point dose measurements
using thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD), optically
stimulated luminescence (OSL) strips, small volume
ionisation chambers, and solid-state diode detectors
[8]. Among these, the diode detector possesses several
advantages due to its high sensitivity, high spatial reso-
lution, and the capability to perform real-time mea-
surements. Therefore, the solid-state diode detector
appears to be a promising alternative to the ionization
chamber based CT dosimetry [9]. The present study
aimed to evaluate the solid state sensor based com-
puted tomography dose profiler (CTDP) probe which
claims to overcome the drawbacks of ionization cham-
ber based CT dose measurements through real-time
dose profile measurements [10]. In addition to CTDI
measurements, the CTDP probe can be used to mea-
sure the geometric efficiency (GE) of CT scanners. As
per international electrotechnical commission
requirements [11], the GE should be checked and the
values should be displayed on the CT scanner console
when GE along the z-axis is 70% or less. In MDCT
scanners, the x-ray beam width is increased beyond
the active detector arrays to avoid penumbral effects
and attain uniform sensitivity profiles for all detector
arrays involved in image data acquisition. This leads to
primary exposure of patient body section wider than
the active detector array width [7]. This effect is refer-
red to as over beaming and can be quantified through
GE measurements [12]. GE measurements are sig-
nificant, especially in the case of narrow beam collima-
tions to avoid excessive overlapped dose delivery in
MDCT scanners [13].
The objectives of the work reported in this paper
were to evaluate the performance of CTDP for (i) mea-
surement of CTDI100 values and comparison with 100
mm ionization chamber measured values; (ii) estima-
tion of efficiency of CTDI100 metric; and (iii) determi-
nation of free in air geometric efficiency for various
beam widths and comparison with the results
obtained using radiochromic film. Although there are
a few previously reported studies on solid-state detec-
tor-based profiler probe [7, 8, 12, 14], they have pro-
vided only fragmented information about its
applications. Moreover, most of these works have used
the probe only as a tool for inter-comparison studies
of other measurement tools/methodologies. In addi-
tion, the majority of the reported studies had been car-
ried out using an earlier version of the CTDP probe
(CT-SD16), which had a different design and
2
P Akhilesh et al
dimensions. As per our knowledge, no published
study has fully evaluated various applications of the
current version of the solid-state detector-based
probe. This is the first comprehensive study that has
focused on the evaluation of the use of the CTDP
probe in the determination of CTDI, geometric effi-
ciency measurements, and its capability to integrate
the entire dose profile for CTDI∞ measurements.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. CT scanner
A Philips Ingenuity 128 multi-slice helical CT (Philips
Medical Systems, The Netherlands) was used in the
current study. This scanner has four options of
operating voltages viz., 80, 100, 120, and 140 kV and
the operating current range is 10–665 mA. The
scanner has 64 rows of solid state GOS detectors with a
total z-axis coverage of 40 mm (64×0.625 mm).
2.2. CTDI measurements
Standard CTDI head and body phantoms (Perspex
cylinders of 160 mm and 320 mm diameter respec-
tively and 150 mm length) were used for CTDI
measurements. DCT 10 ionization chamber (RTI
Electronics, Sweden) which is a standard 100 mm long
ionisation chamber was used for CTDI100 measure-
ments. CT dose profiler version 2.0 was used with
Piranha electrometer (RTI Electronics, Sweden) for
CTDI measurements in helical mode as recommended
by the manufacturer. The CTDP probe is a point dose
detector that has a solid-state sensor of 0.25 mm
thickness placed 30 mm from the end of the probe. On
irradiation, the detector registers the dose value at that
point and sends the information to the recording
system at a sampling rate of 2000 dose values per
second [10]. To collect the dose at the different
positions for creating the dose profile, the probe must
be moved through the CT beam which is achieved by
placing it free in air or in a phantom and then using the
couch movement to scan the probe. Hence it is not
possible to use axial scans for measuring CTDI with
the CTDP probe.
Since majority of adult scan procedures are per-
formed using 120 kV and pediatric protocols use 80
kV, CTDI measurements were performed for these
two tube voltage settings. The standard procedure as
outlined in AAPM Report No. 96 [15] was followed for
CTDI measurements using a DCT 10 ionization
chamber for both head and body protocols. For CTDI
measurements using the CTDP probe, instructions
given in the user manual were followed. To measure
CTDI100, CTDP was connected to the Piranha electro-
meter which in turn was connected to a computer loa-
ded with the Ocean software (Version 3.12A RTI
Electronics, Sweden) for evaluation and calculation of
different parameters from the measured dose profile.
For CTDI measurements, CTDP was positioned in the
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007
central hole of the CTDI phantom and a helical scan
was performed. The pitch values of 0.3 and 1 were
used for head and body protocols, respectively. Unlike
CTDI measurements using a standard 100 mm long
ionization chamber which requires five axial scans to
estimate dose in one central and four peripheral posi-
tions in CTDI phantom for calculating weighted CTDI
(CTDIw), only one helical scan is required to estimate
CTDI values using CTDP. Ocean software uses
k-factor which is a ratio of CTDIw to CTDI100,center as a
multiplication factor to convert measured
CTDI100,center to CTDIw. User may also specify
k-factor calculated from ion chamber measurements
for the scanner type used, in which case calculations
will be performed based on the user defined value.
Based on the kilovoltage, filtration, and mode of mea-
surement specified by the user in the template before
measurement, the software automatically corrects all
dose and dose rate values measured by CTDP for the
energy dependence of the solid-state detector.
CTDIw values measured by CTDP in helical scan-
ning mode were normalised to 100 mAs (nCTDIw) as
given below [14] and compared with CTDIw (mGy/
100 mAs) measured by DCT 10 ionization chamber:
nCTDIw=
100
CTDIw ⁎
Applied mA ⁎ Tube rotation time
´ [mGy / 100mAs] (1)
2.3. Efficiency of CTDI100 dose metric
The integrations limits of the dose profile were placed
beyond the end of scatter dose tails of the measured
dose profile through the interactive Ocean software
and the resulting CTDI was noted as CTDI∞. The
efficiency ( ) of the CTDI100 metric was assessed by
calculating the ratio of CTDI100 measured in the center
hole position to CTDI∞ measured in the same
position of both head and body phantoms [5]
CTDI100
= (2)
CTDI¥
2.4. Determination of free in air geometric efficiency
using CTDP
Geometric efficiency is defined as the integral of the
dose profile along the z-direction, integrated over the
range subtended by the detector elements used during
acquisition, expressed as a percentage of the total
integral of the dose profile in the z-direction [16].
The CTDP probe was positioned free in air at the
isocenter for the measurement of GE (Supplementary
figure 1 (available online at stacks.iop.org/BPEX/8/
065007/mmedia)). The GE calculations are done from
the dose profile waveform measured by the detector
probe. The software finds the maximum dose rate that
occurred during the scan from the waveform. From
this point, the software searches backward to find the
point where the dose profile goes below 50% (D1) of
3
P Akhilesh et al
the maximum value and similarly it searches for the
50% point in the forward direction (D2). The full
width at half maximum (FWHM) is calculated as the
distance between D1 and D2. GE is then calculated as
GE = (Dose between D1 and D2*100) / Total dose
(3)
Free in air dose profiles were measured for both head
and body protocols for all available beam collimations
in helical scanning mode viz.,40 mm, 25 mm, and 10
mm for head and 40 mm, 25 mm, 10 mm, 5 mm, and
2.5 mm for body scan protocol. The tube load was
adjusted so that only small focal spot was in use for all
scans performed for the determination of GE.
2.5. Verification of free in air geometric efficiency
using XR-QA2 films
GafchromicTMXR-QA2 film (Ashland Inc., Caving-
ton, KY) specially designed for general radiology
quality assurance tests was used for recording the dose
profile. The XR-QA2 film dimensions used in this
study were 10’× 12’. Each film was cut into three strips
each of dimensions 80 mm×300 mm. The film
calibration procedure and readout methodology are
available in detail elsewhere [17]. Since radiochromic
films exhibit considerable energy dependence, film
calibration was performed for both 80 kV and 120 kV
beam qualities used in the current study. To measure
free in air GE, film strip was positioned at the scanner
isocenter with the support of a long plastic scale affixed
to the end of the patient table to avoid table
interference (Supplementary figure 2). The exposed
films were scanned after 24 h using an Epson Expres-
sion 10000XL flatbed scanner.
The scanned 16-bit images with 72 dpi resolution
were imported into Octave. Several (∼10) profiles of
200 mm length along the z-axis in the central region of
the film were considered for the calculation of net
reflectance. Depending upon the energy of the beam
the calibration factors were applied to derive the dose
for various profiles along the z-axis.
Each dose profile was normalized to the maximum
value and pixel indices of half values on both sides of
the maximum dose value were recorded as PX1 and
PX2. Using the resolution of the image (R) the FWHM
was calculated as
FWHM = ∣ PX1 - PX2∣*25.4 R (4)
Similarly, for every profile, the FWHM values were
calculated for each film. The median value of FWHM
was used in the computation of GE. The GE was com-
puted as
PX 2
ò
GE = PX1
D (z ) dz
(5)
100
ò-100 D (z ) dz
As the pixel values are discrete the above equation (4)
can be written as
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007
Figure 1. Plot of normalised CTDIw values estimated using CTDP in helical mode (pitch=0.3 for head and pitch = 1 for body
protocol) and 100 mm long ionization chamber in axial mode for head and body protocols for various beam widths.
å PX D (z )
PX1
GE = 2
(6)
å -100 D (z )
100
2.6. Repeatability of measurements using CTDP
The repeatability of solid-state detector based CTDP
probe for CTDI and GE measurements was assessed in
terms of standard deviation. Five repeated measure-
ments of CTDIw were performed for all beam collima-
tions available in head mode of operation at 120 kV.
Similarly free in air GE measurements were also
repeated five times using the CTDP probe at 120 kV,
body mode of operation to estimate the standard
deviation for every available collimation.
3. Results
Normalised CTDIw values estimated using CTDP
probe in helical mode and 100 mm long ionization
chamber in axial mode for head and body protocols at
80 kV and 120 kV are presented in figure 1.
Good correspondence was observed, but with a
slightly larger difference in measurements performed
with the head phantom. As all CTDI measurements
using CTDP are performed in helical mode, a compar-
ison was made between CTDIvol values displayed on
the CT scanner console and CTDIvol values measured
by the CTDP probe. Results of comparison for all
selectable beam collimations available in the helical
mode of scanner operation are illustrated in figure 2.
The average difference between CTDIvol displayed by
the CT scanner console and CTDP measured values
was less than 2%.
The ratios of CTD1100 efficiency determined for
various beam collimation settings and tube voltages
are presented in table 1. The lengths of the total dose
4
P Akhilesh et al
profile observed for various beam collimation settings
over which dose profile integration was performed for
calculating CTDI∞ are also given in table 1. For the
most commonly used tube voltage of 120 kV, the
reduction in CTDI100 efficiency with an increase in
beam width from 10 mm to 40 mm was approximately
4% for head and body phantom measurements.
Figures 3 and 4 show the real time dose profiles mea-
sured by CTDP for estimation of CTDI at 120 kV for
different beam collimations in head and body phan-
tom respectively. In all cases, the dose profiles show
that scatter dose tails extend beyond the standard 100
mm length of integration limits defined for CTDI100.
Free in air beam profiles measured by CTDP probe
for various beam collimations at 120 kV (head mode)
to determine GE are shown in figure 5 along with the
corresponding profiles measured using XR-QA2
films. GE values measured by CTDP probe and XR-
QA2 films for head and body modes of operation at 80
kV and 120 kV are presented in table 2. The differences
between the GE values measured by the solid-state
detector probe and films were within 7%. The GE
value was below 70% only for the beam collimation of
2.5 mm.
The repeatability of the CTDP probe estimated for
five repeated measurements of CTDIw and GE in the
current study was found to be within 0.3% and 0.7%,
respectively.
4. Discussion
The standard method of CTDI measurements is based
on five axial scans with a 100 mm long ionization
chamber positioned in the central and four peripheral
holes in the cylindrical CTDI phantom. The CTDP
evaluated in the present study is designed to fit into the
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007 P Akhilesh et al

Figure 2. Plot of CTDIvol values measured by CTDP probe and the corresponding values displayed on CT scanner console (pitch = 0.3
for head and pitch = 1 for body protocol).

Table 1. CTDI100 efficiency values for all available beam output measurements should be explored. Since the
collimations in helical scan mode. The measurements were
performed with the CTDP probe positioned in the central hole of CTDP probe moves through the beam during expo-
the CTDI head and body phantoms. sure, measuring CTDI along any length of choice is
Length of
possible with this system. The associated software
Collimation dose pro- CTDI100 Effi- provides real time display of the captured dose profile
Protocol kV (mm) file (mm) ciency (ò) (%) which is a superior feature of the CTDP system. The
present study was undertaken to evaluate the perfor-
Head 120 40 233 82.3 mance of solid-state diode based CTDP probe for
25 208 84.6
CTDI measurements and also to experimentally
10 185 85.7
80 40 237 84.7 determine the efficiency of CTDI100 dose metric when
25 213 85.3 standard phantoms are used.
10 188 86.2 The difference between values of CTDIw derived
Body 120 40 257 76.1 from the CTDP probe and ionization chamber was in
25 223 78.6 the range of 3% to 12% and the average difference was
10 196 80.0
8%. The values of CTDIw measured by CTDP were
5 184 80.5
consistently lower than the same measured by DCT 10
80 40 255 77.3
25 224 80.1 ionization chamber for both tube voltages and various
10 203 81.0 beam collimation settings used in the present study.
5 186 81.4 The Ocean software calculates CTDI100 from the dose
profile waveform which includes a maximum of 1024
samples [10]. The sampling losses during the dose pro-
standard CTDI phantoms and a single helical scan file integration may be a reason for the difference
performed with the probe in the center hole of the between CTDP and ion chamber measured values.
head/body phantom is only required for the head/ The differences were more in case of head phantom
body CTDI measurement respectively. The standard which may be due to table attenuation resulting from
ionization chamber based method of CTDI measure- multiple tube rotations in helical mode in head proto-
ment cannot measure scatter dose tails beyond its col due to the lower pitch value, in comparison to ion
length of 100 mm and also the user cannot see the chamber measurements in axial mode.
measured dose profile. The results of Monte Carlo Good agreement was observed between the
simulation studies performed by Boone JM [5] illus- CTDIvol values displayed on the CT scanner console
trate that the efficiency of the CTDI100 measurement and CTDP measured CTDIvol values. The efficiency of
even for 10 mm beam widths is low and, consequently, CTDI100 metric estimated using CTDP probe and 150
dose computations based on this metric may not yield mm long phantoms was in the range of 82% to 86%
the desired accuracy. As current day MDCT scanners for head phantom and varied from 76% to 80% for
provide much higher beam collimations, alternate body phantom measurements. The ò values in the pre-
detectors and methodology for CT scanner dose sent study for center hole measurements in head

5
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007 P Akhilesh et al

Figure 3. Dose profiles measured by CTDP probe positioned in central hole of head phantom for estimation of CTDI at 120 kV for
beam collimations of (A) 64*0.625 mm=40 mm, (B) 40*0.625 mm=25 mm, and (C) 16*0.625 mm = 10 mm.

phantom are in close agreement (4% difference) with
the ò values reported by Boone JM [5] based on the
Monte Carlo simulation study carried out using ioniz-
ation chamber. However, there was a large difference
(16% higher in the current study) in the efficiency of
CTDI100 metric estimated in the center hole of the
body phantom. The Monte Carlo simulation study by
Boone JM [5] has modelled a 500 mm long detector
and infinitely long phantom for estimation of CTDI∞
which would increase the scatter dose contribution to
dose profile relatively more in body phantom due to its
larger size. This will in turn increase CTDI∞, resulting
in lower ò values. The results prove that the standard
150 mm length of the head CTDI phantom is adequate
in simulating scatter generated in human head
whereas the standard 150 mm length of the body
phantom is insufficient in generating the scatter to
simulate the length of human torso.
The CTDI measurements using CTDP are rela-
tively quick and easy to perform. Use of TLDs, OSL
strips, methacrylic acid-based gel (nMAG) dosimeter,
small volume ionization chambers, and photodiode
arrays for CTDI measurements have been reported [8,
18–20]. The use of TLD arrays for performing CTDI
measurements is labour intensive and time consum-
ing due to complex annealing and read out proce-
dures. OSL based CTDI probe though easy to use, has
a major limitation that it needs to be sent back to the

6
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007 P Akhilesh et al

Figure 4. Dose profiles measured by CTDP probe positioned in the central hole of body phantom for estimation of CTDI at 120 kV for
beam collimations of (A) 64*0.625 mm=40 mm, (B) 40*0.625 mm=25 mm, and (C) 16*0.625 mm = 10 mm.

manufacturer for processing and hence immediate
readouts are not available to the user [20]. The gel
based dosimeter has advantages of being near tissue
equivalent and can provide 3D dose distribution but
has poor sensitivity. The CTDP requires minimum
user intervention as the system software automatically
calculates and displays the CTDI values and dose pro-
files, but it cannot measure CTDI100 in axial mode.
The geometric efficiency is an important para-
meter to be measured in MDCT scanners for quantify-
ing the radiation beam utilisation efficiency for
various beam collimations used for patient scans. IEC
recommends the CT manufactures to alert the user of
the parameter when its value goes below 70%.
Detectors that can record dose profiles can be used for
measurement of GE. TLD arrays and radiographic
films are commonly used for the determination of
dose profile and geometric efficiency in CT scanners.
Both the methods are time consuming and laborious
due to the handling, calibration, and read out proce-
dures. Determination of x-ray beam width and GE
using self developing radiochromic films has also been
reported [21]. The spatial resolution and the nature of
2D dosimetry make radiochromic films a suitable
choice for dose profile measurements [19]. Hence
radiochromic films were used in the present study to
validate the dose profile and GE measurements per-
formed by the CTDP probe. The Ocean software

7
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007
Figure 5. Free in air dose profiles measured by CTDP probe at 120 kV for beam collimations of (A) 40 mm, (B) 25 mm, and (C) 10 mm
(dotted black lines indicate nominal beam collimation); and by XR-QA2 films at 120 kV for beam collimations of (D) 40 mm, (E) 25
mm, and (F) 10 mm for calculation of geometric efficiency.
which is required for use of CTDP has built in tem-
plates for the determination of GE. The user has to
perform a single helical scan free in air and the soft-
ware displays the measured dose profile and calculates
GE for the selected beam collimation. Compared to
other existing methods solid state detector based
CTDP is the fastest means of measuring dose profiles
and GE.
On comparing the results of the CTDP probe and
XR-QA2 radiochromic film measured GE values,
good agreement was observed, the maximum differ-
ence being 6.7%. GE decreases with decrease in beam
width and is clearly due to the increase in the penum-
bral region in comparison to the total beam width as
the beam width decreases. The GE values were below
8
P Akhilesh et al
70% only for the beam collimation of 2.5 mm for the
128 slice CT scanner used in the present study. Beam
collimations narrower than 2.5 mm were not available
in the helical mode in this scanner. GE of ultra narrow
beam collimations available in the sequential mode
was not measured since CTDP is recommended for
use only in helical mode. No significant effect of tube
voltage and modes of scanning (head/body) on free in
air GE was observed in this study. Similar findings
have been reported by a previous study [12]. The dose
profiles measured by both methods show asymmetry
in the high dose region which may be attributed to the
heel effect and was observed in all beam settings used
in the present study. The small undulations observed
in the CTDP measured dose profile may be due to a
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007 P Akhilesh et al

Table 2. Free in air geometric efficiency measured by CTDP probe Kadam of RP&AD, BARC during the course of this
and Gafchromic XR-QA2 films (Mode: Helical).
study.
Geometric Effi-
Nominal beam colli- ciency (%)
Protocol kV mation (mm) Data availability statement
XR-
CTDP QA2 film All data that support the findings of this study are
Head 120 40 87.2 90.0
included within the article (and any supplemen-
25 85.4 88.2 tary files).
10 75.2 79.9
80 40 90.5 90.1
25 85.8 86.3
Declaration of interest
10 77.9 76.2
Body 120 40 92.0 92.1 None.
25 90.3 90.7
10 78.5 73.5
5 75.7 71.5
Funding
2.5 55.4 56.0
80 40 91.8 88.0 This research did not receive any specific grant from
25 89.6 86.7 funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-
10 78.0 83.0 for-profit sectors.
5 71.6 71.1
2.5 60.1 64.0
ORCID iDs

marginal misalignment in the positioning of the probe Philomina Akhilesh https://orcid.org/0000-0002-

at the isocenter. There are some limitations in the pre-
sent study. Standard CTDI phantoms were used for
the determination of efficiency of the CTDI100 metric
since the purpose was to demonstrate the use of the
profiler in measuring scatter tails beyond the standard
integration length of 100mm. To obtain the entire
scatter dose for the ideal representation of CTDI∞,
phantoms of longer length are required.
5. Conclusions
The solid-state detector based CTDP probe may be
used to efficiently measure helical scan dose profiles
and geometric efficiency of MDCT scanners. Unlike
the 100 mm long ionization chamber, the CTDP probe
is not limited to dose integration over a length of 100
mm, but it can cover any length over which dose
integration is desired. The CTDP requires minimal
user intervention as the dose profiles, CTDI values and
GE are displayed immediately after measurement. In
comparison to all other existing methods, the CTDP
probe is easy to use and provides quick measurements
of both CTDI and GE which can save a considerable
amount of medical physicist’s time. A major drawback
of the CTDP probe is its inability to measure in
sequential/axial mode. Also, CTDI measurements
using the CTDP probe may require corrections for
sampling losses.
Acknowledgments
Authors gratefully acknowledge the technical support
provided by Mrs. Shramika H Jambhale and Mr Vivek
0511-8062
References
[1] McCollough C H, Primak A N, Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L and
Christner J 2009 Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT
Radiologic clinics of North America. 47 27–40
[2] Kambic G X and Jucius R A 1979 Pencil shaped ionization
chamber for exposure from a computed tomography scan
Med. Phys. 6 459
[3] Shope T, Gagne R and Johnson G 1981 A method for
describing the doses delivered by the transmission x-ray
computed tomography J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 8 488–95
[4] Kim S, Song H, Samei E, Yin F F and Yoshizumi T T 2011
Computed tomography dose index and dose length product
for cone-beam CT: Monte Carlo simulations J Appl Clin Med
Phys. 12 84–95
[5] Boone J M 2007 The trouble with CTDI100 Med. Phys. 34
1364–71
[6] Yang K, Li Z, Li X and Liu B 2019 Characterization of dynamic
collimation mechanisms for helical CT scans with direct
measurements Phys. Med. Biol. 64 215006
[7] Perisinakis K, Papadakis A E and Damilakis J 2009 The effect of
x-ray beam quality and geometry on radiation utilization
efficiency in multidetector CT imaging Med. Phys. 36 1258–66
[8] Bauhs J A, Vrieze T J, Primak A N, Bruesewitz M R and
McCollough C H 2008 CT dosimetry: comparison of
measurement techniques and devices Radiographics. 28
245–53
[9] Paschoal C M M, Ferreira F C L, Souza D N and Santos L A P
2016 Comparison of dose measurements in CT using a
photodiode and a small ion chamber Radiat. Meas. 91 50–3
[10] Dose C T 2014 Profiler User’s Manual –English- Version 6.2A.
(Sweden: RTI Electronics)
[11] International Electrotechnical Commission 2016 Part 2-44.
IEC 60601-2-44:2009+AMD1:2012+AMD2:2016 CSV
Consolidated Version Ed.3.2 Particular requirements for the
basic safety and essential performance of X-ray equipment for
computed tomography
[12] Berris T, Perisinakis K, Papadakis A E and Damilakis J 2013
Comparison of methods for assessing geometric efficiency on
multi-detector CT scanners Phys Med. 29 312–22

9
Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 8 (2022) 065007
[13] Kobayashi M, Koshida K, Suzuki S and Katada K 2011
Evaluation of geometric efficiency and radiation exposure in z-
axis for volume scan Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 143 63–8
[14] Grönlund E, Klang A T, Olerud H and Bjerke H 2013
Calibration & Clinical Measurements in Computed Tomography
-An Evaluation of Different Dosimetric Methods (Oslo: Spring)
[15] American Association of Physicists in Medicine 2008 The
Measurement, Reporting, And Management Of Radiation Dose
In Ct. (MD, USA: College Park: Report of AAPM Task Group
23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee)
[16] International Electrotechnical Commission 2002 International
Standard Amendment 1 to IEC 60601-2-44, edition 2: Medical
Electrical Equipment, Part 2-44: Particular Requirements for the
Safety of X-ray Equipment for Computed Tomography. (Geneva,
Switzerland: IEC)
[17] Akhilesh P, Kulkarni A R, Jamhale S H, Sharma S D,
Kumar R and Datta D 2017 Estimation of eye lens dose during
10
P Akhilesh et al
brain scans using Gafchromic XR-QA2 film in various
multidetector CT scanners Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 174 236–41
[18] Nakonechny K D, Fallone B G and Rathee S 2005 Novel
methods of measuring single scan dose profiles and cumulative
dose in CT Med. Phys. 32 98–109
[19] Chuang C C and Wu J 2018 Dose and slice thickness evaluation
with nMAG gel dosimeters in computed tomography Sci. Rep.
8 2632
[20] Vrieze T J, Sturchio G M and McCollough C H 2012 Technical
note: precision and accuracy of a commercially available CT
optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for the
measurement of CT dose index Med. Phys. 39 6580–4
[21] Liillau T, Liebmann M, von Boetticher H and Poppe B 2012
SU-E-I-42: measurement of X-ray beam width and geometric
efficiency in MDCT using radiochromic films Med. Phys.
39 3634