Radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray systems: Quality control of the X-ray tube and automatic exposure control using theoretical spectra to determine air kerma and dose to a homogenous phantom.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To develop a method to perform quality control (QC) of X-ray tubes and automatic exposure control (AEC) as a part of the QC of the radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray system. Our aim is to verify the output from the X-ray tube by comparing the measured radiation output, or air kerma, to the theoretical output given the applied exposure settings and geometry, in addition to comparing the measured kV to the nominal kV. The AEC system for fluoroscopic and conventional X-ray systems is assessed by determining the absorbed dose to a homogenous phantom with different thicknesses. METHOD: This study presents a model to verify the X-ray tube measurement results and a method to determine the dose to a homogenous phantom (Dphantom ). The following input is needed a parameterized model of the X-ray spectrum, the X-ray tube measurements using a multifunctional X-ray meter, the exposure parameters recorded via imaging of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) slabs of different thickness that simulate the patient using AEC, and a parameterized model for calculating the dose to water from Monte Carlo simulations. The output is the entrance surface dose (ESD) and absorbed dose in the phantom, Dphantom (µGy). In addition, the parameterized X-ray spectrum is used to compare theoretical and measured air kerma as a part of the QC of the X-ray tube. To verify the proposed method, the X-ray spectrum provided in this study, SPECTRUM, was compared to two commercially available spectra, SpekCalc and Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine (IPEM) 78. The fraction of energy imparted to the homogenous phantom was compared to the imparted fraction calculated by PCXMC. RESULTS: The spectrum provided in this study was in good agreement with two previously published X-ray spectra. The absolute percentage differences of the spectra varied from 0.05% to 3.9%, with an average of 1.4%, compared to SpekCalc. Similarly, the deviation from IPEM report 78 varied from 0.02% to 2.3%, with an average of 0.74%. The SPECTRUM was parameterized for calculation of the imparted fraction for target angles of 10°, 12°, and 15°, kV (50-150 kV) with the materials Al (2.2-8 mm), Cu (0-1 mm), and any combination of the filters, PMMA and water. The deviation of energy imparted from the results by PCXMC was less than 8% for all measurements across different kV, filtration, and vendors, obtained by using PMMA to record the exposure parameters, while the dose was calculated based on water with same thicknesses as the PMMA. CONCLUSION: This study presents an accurate and suitable method to perform a part of the QC of fluoroscopic and conventional X-ray systems with respect to the X-ray tube and the associated AEC system. The method is suitable for comparing protocols within and between systems via the absorbed dose.