ArticleRadiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993)2025
Patient-specific organ dose calculation using automatic segmentation and extension of CT scans.
Article in Radiation physics and chemistry (Oxford, England : 1993), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fetal organ dose calculator for maternal CT.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Exposure and impact: highlights from the second scientific conference and recent activities of the International Society of Radiation Epidemiology and Dosimetry (ISoRED).Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection · 2026Article
- Review of GPU-based Monte Carlo simulation platforms for transmission and emission tomography in medicine.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The primary objective of this study is to develop a fast and automated methodology for calculating personalized radiation organ dose from computed tomography (CT) scans using anatomical models derived from the CT images of the patient obtained during the imaging procedure. To validate this method, a comparison was conducted between experimentally measured dose values in a CT scan and those obtained through Monte Carlo simulation. Multiple point dose measurements were taken within a RANDO phantom during a Siemens Somatom Emotion CT scan, employing Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor dosimeters. The software tools described in this work facilitate automatic Monte Carlo simulations using DICOM metadata and images from patient CT scans. A personalized patient-specific 3D voxelized model was created based on the DICOM images, and the radiation dose was estimated using the MC-GPU Monte Carlo code, which supports parallelization on a GPU. The required inputs for the simulations were automatically extracted from the DICOM data. Additionally, this study outlines the procedure for calculating the dose in actual patients (where the scans only cover a fraction of the body) and presents a comparison of the results with NCICT dose calculator, which uses a library of computational phantoms. A previously developed anatomical extension technique was applied to realistically extend the partially captured patient anatomy. Without this technique, the mean dose to organs that are only partially included in the CT scan is likely overestimated. Furthermore, a realistic case that uses a complete CT scan anatomy considering 134 anatomical structures or organs is presented. The results demonstrate a consistent trend when comparing simulated and experimental values, with a median difference of 5.7%. When comparing the simulated results with NCICT estimations, we observe similar magnitudes of values overall. However, significant dose differences up to 51% are noted for some organs, underscoring the importance of personalizing the dose calculation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.