KEIKANTSEONE SEGANO

201405133

LAB 5: RADIATION FILTERS EFFECT ON THE EFFECTIVE AND ABSORBED DOSES

RECEIVED BY THE PATIENT USING MONTE CARLO SIMULATION
Aim: to find the most suitable filtration material and its thickness between lead (Pb) and
aluminium (Al) on skull PA projection of a 1 year old child using Monte Carlo simulation to
assess the effective doses and the doses absorbed by the skull.
THEORY
Absorbed dose is a measure of the actual energy deposited in an irradiated mass, while the
Equivalent dose is used to assess how much biological damage is expected from the absorbed
dose provided that different types of radiation have different damaging properties.
Effective dose is a quantity defined in ICRP Publication 60 as a weighted sum of equivalent
doses to all relevant tissues and organ with the purpose to indicate the combination of different
doses to several different tissues in a way that is likely to correlate well with the total of the
stochastic effects. The unit is the joule per kilogram (J/kg) and is given the special name Sievert
(Sv). Effective dose is used to assess the potential for long-term effects that might occur in the
future.
Dose Affecting Factors includes: X-ray beam parameters (KVp) and added filtration; higher kVp
results in lower dose while higher added filtration results in lower dose.
Filtration is required to absorb the lower-energy x-ray photons emitted by the tube before they
reach the target. The use of filters produce a cleaner image by absorbing the lower energy x-ray
photons that tend to scatter more. The amount of filtration of the x-ray beam is specified by and
based on the voltage potential (Kev) used to produce the beam. The thickness of filter materials
is dependent on atomic numbers, kilo voltage settings and the desired filtration factor.
PA (posterior-anterior) projection- the central x-ray beam enters though the back part of the body
and leaves through the front part of the body.
NOTE: Skull (PA) effective dose limit is 0.03 mSv
 PROEDURE
Part 1
PCXMC 20 version was clicked on the computer to open it then compute doses button was
clicked and the x-ray spectrum was changed to 70 Kvp then the first corresponding thicknesses
of aluminium and lead filters were typed. The anode angle used was 14 degrees. Still under
compute doses the open MC data for calculation button was clicked and then 1 year old folder
on the desktop in PCXMC file was opened to select head PA saved exposures. Then Current
time product was set to 1.000 mAs to display the results and then the effective dose ICRP and
skull absorbed dose were recorded to be used later in drawing a line graph of doses vs thickness.
The procedures above were done for all corresponding filter thicknesses.
Part 2
PCXMC 20 version was clicked on the computer to open it then compute doses button was
clicked and the x-ray spectrum was changed to 70 Kvp then the first thicknesses of
aluminium/lead filter was typed while the other one is set to zero. The anode angle used was 14
degrees. Still under compute doses the open MC data for calculation button was clicked and
then 1 year old folder on the desktop in PCXMC file was opened to select head PA saved
exposures. Then Current time product was set to 1.000 mAs to display the results and then the
skull absorbed dose was recorded to be used later in drawing a line graph of absorbed dose vs
thickness. The procedures above were done for all lead filter thicknesses and aluminium filter
thicknesses while the other one is set to zero.
 RESULTS PRESENTATION

Table 1: COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVE DOSES AND SKULL ABSORBED DOSES

OBTAINED FROM THE CORRESPONDING COMBINATION OF ALUMINIUM AND
LEAD FILTER THICKNESS.
ALUMINIUM LEAD EFFECTIVE DOSE SKULL ABSORBED
THICKNESS THICKNESS (mSv) DOSE (mSv)
(mm) (mm)
0.1 0.1 0.000562 0.018072
0.2 0.3 0.000091 0.002584
0.3 0.6 0.000012 0.000326
0.4 0.9 0.000002 0.000057
0.5 1.2 0.000000 0.000011
0.6 1.5 0.000000 0.000002
0.7 1.8 0.000000 0.000001
 SKULL (PA) DOSES VS LEAD FILTER THICKNESS ON A 1 YEAR OLD
CHILD
0.02

0.018

0.016
DOSE (mSv)

0.014

0.012

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8

LEAD THICKNESS (mm)

EFFECTIVE DOSE (mSv) SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)

Figure1: The figure shows the dependency of effective dose (mSv) and skull absorbed dose (mSv)
on the lead thickness (mm) for PA projection of a 1 year old child. In PA projection the central
ray of the x-ray beam enters through the back part of the skull and leaves through the front part
thus creating less damage to the important organs like eyes because of its reduction in strength
due to interactions with bones. Skull has high atomic number therefore it absorbs more dose. The
graph shows that the skull absorbed dose decreases almost exponentially with the increase in lead
thickness while the effective dose is almost constant with the increasing lead filter thickness.
 SKULL (PA) DOSES VS ALUMINIUM FILTER THICKNESS ON A 1 YEAR OLD
CHILD
0.02

0.018

0.016
DOSES (mSv)

0.014

0.012

0.01

0.008

0.006

0.004

0.002

0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

ALUMINIUM THICKNESS (mm)

EFFECTIVE DOSE (mSv) SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)

Figure 2: The figure shows the dependency of effective dose (mSv) and skull absorbed dose (mSv) on
the aluminium thickness (mm) for PA projection of a 1 year old child. In PA projection the central ray
of the x-ray beam enters through the back part of the skull and leaves through the front part thus
creating less damage to the important organs like eyes because of its reduction in strength due to
interactions with bones. Skull has high atomic number therefore it absorbs more dose. The graph
shows that the skull absorbed dose decreases almost exponentially with the increase in aluminium
thickness while the effective dose is almost constant with the increasing aluminium filter thickness.
Table 2: SKULL ABSORBED DOSES OBTAINED FROM DIFFERENT LEAD FILTER
THICKNESSES.
LEAD THICKNESS SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)
(mm)
0.10 0.018322
0.25 0.003962
0.30 0.002631
0.48 0.000721
0.60 0.000334
0.68 0.000206
0.80 0.000102

SKULL (PA) ABSORBED DOSE VS LEAD FILTER THICKNESS ON A 1

YEAR OLD CHILD
0.025
SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)

0.02

0.015

0.01

0.005

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

LEAD THICKNESS (mm)

Figure 3: This figure shows the absorbed dose (mSv) received by the skull of a 1 year child in PA
projection for different lead filter thicknesses (mm). In PA projection the central ray of the x -ray
beam enters through the back part of the skull and leaves through the front part thus creating
less damage to the important organs like eyes because of its reduction in strength due to
interactions with bones. Skull has high atomic number therefore it absorbs more dose. The graph
shows that skull absorbed dose decreases almost exponentially with the increase in lead thickness.
Table 3: ABSORBED DOSES OBTAINED FROM DIFFERENT ALUMINIUM FILTER
THICKNESSES.
ALUMINIUM THICKNESS SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)
(mm)
1.00 0.109454
1.85 0.083315
2.50 0.070126
3.12 0.060522
4.00 0.050097
4.79 0.042901
5.12 0.040341

SKULL (PA) ABSORBED DOSE VS ALUMINIUM FILTER

THICKNESS ON A 1 YEAR OLD CHILD
0.14

0.12
SKULL ABSORBED DOSE (mSv)

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

ALUMINIUM THICKNESS (mm)

Figure 4: This figure shows the absorbed dose (mSv) received by the skull of a 1 year child in PA
projection for different aluminium filter thicknesses (mm). In PA projection the central ray of the
x-ray beam enters through the back part of the skull and leaves through the front part thus
creating less damage to the important organs like eyes because of its reduction in strength due to
interactions with bones. Skull has high atomic number therefore it absorbs more dose. The graph
shows that skull absorbed dose decreases almost linearly with the increase in aluminium
thickness.
 DISCUSION
From all the figures it is clear that skull absorbed dose decreases with the increase in the
filter thickness. Looking at figures 1 and 2 drawn from table 1 one can make an
approximation that the combination of 0.20 mm aluminium filter and 0.30 mm lead filter is
quiet good since it represent a rapid fall in skull absorbed dose. Skull absorbs more dose
when using aluminium filter than when using lead filter.
When increasing the total filtration while holding the kVp fixed resulted in mean decreases
in the effective dose and rapid fall in skull absorbed dose. Good filtration does not pose a
problem in terms of reduction in image quality.
I recommend the use of lead filter at 0.25 mm thickness or the combination of 0.20 mm
aluminium filter and 0.30 mm lead filter since they result in lower patient dose. Lead is a
good filter since it has fairly high atomic number. I also recommend the use of copper filter
at 0.45 mm thickness.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion one can say that lead filter is the best filter when used with the thickness of
0.25 mm when compared to aluminium because it give the skull absorbed dose that is far
less than the effective dose limit of the skull; 0.03 mSv.