Fundamental Study of nanoDot OSL Dosimeters for Entrance Skin Dose Measurement in Diagnostic X-ray Examinations

  • Received : 2015.07.17
  • Accepted : 2016.05.27
  • Published : 2016.09.30


Background: In order to manage the patient exposure dose in X-ray diagnosis, it is preferred to evaluate the entrance skin dose; although there are some evaluations about entrance skin dose, a small number of report has been published for direct measurement of patient. We think that a small-type optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter, named nanoDot, can achieve a direct measurement. For evaluations, the corrections of angular and energy dependences play an important role. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the angular and the energy dependences of nanoDot. Materials and Methods: We used commercially available X-ray diagnostic equipment. For angular dependence measurement, a relative response of every 15 degrees of nanoDot was measured in 40-140 kV X-ray. And for energy dependence measurement, mono-energetic characteristic X-rays were generated using several materials by irradiating the diagnostic X-rays, and the nanoDot was irradiated by the characteristic X-rays. We evaluated the measured response in an energy range of 8.1-75.5 keV. In addition, we performed Monte-Carlo simulation to compare experimental results. Results and Discussion: The experimental results were in good agreement with those of Monte-Carlo simulation. The angular dependence of nanoDot was almost steady with the response of 0 degrees except for 90 and 270 degrees. Furthermore, we found that difference of the response of nanoDot, where the nanoDot was irradiated from the randomly set directions, was estimated to be at most 5%. On the other hand, the response of nanoDot varies with the energy of incident X-rays; slightly increased to 20 keV and gradually decreased to 80 keV. These results are valuable to perform the precise evaluation of entrance skin dose with nanoDot in X-ray diagnosis. Conclusion: The influence of angular dependence and energy dependence in X-ray diagnosis is not so large, and the nanoDot OSL dosimeter is considered to be suitable dosimeter for direct measurement of entrance surface dose of patient.


  1. Gonzalez AB, Darby S, Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-ray: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet. 2004;363:345-351.
  2. Uffmann M, Prokop CS, Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. Eur. J. Radiol. 2009;72:202-208.
  3. Gardner SJ, Studenski MT, Giaddui T, Cui Y, Galvin J, Yu Y, Xiao Y. Investigation into image quality and dose for different patient geometries with multiple cone-beam CT systems. Med. Phys. 2014; 41(3):031908-1-11.
  4. American Association of Physicists in Medicine by the American Institute of Physics. Fetal dose from radiotherapy with photon beams. AAPM Report No.50. 1995; 63-82.
  5. Piesch E, Burgkhardt B, Vilgis M, Photoluminescence dosimetry: progress and present state of art. Radiat. Prot. Dosim.1990; 33:215-226.
  6. Cho SJ, Kim WT, Ki YG, Kwon SI, Lee SH, Huh DH, Cho KH, Kwon BH, Kim DW. In vivo dosimetry with MOSFET detector during radiotherapy. World congress on medical physics and biomedical engineering. Seoul, Korea. August 27 - September 1, 2006.
  7. Bao Q, Hrycushko BA, Dugas JP, Hager FH, Solberg TD. A technique for pediatric total skin electron irradiation. Radiat. Oncol. 2012; 7(40):1-7.
  8. Maehata I, Hayashi H, Kimoto N, Takegami K, Okino H, Kanazawa Y, Tominaga M. Practical method for determination of air kerma by use of an ionization chamber toward construction of a secondary X-ray field to be used in clinical examination rooms. Radiol. Phys. Tech. 2016; 9(2):193-201.
  9. Grosswendt B, Backscatter factors for x-rays generated at voltages between 10 and 100 keV. Phys. Med. Biol. 1984; 29(5):579-591.
  10. Klevenhagen SC. Experimentally determined backscatter factors for x-rays generated at voltages between 16 and 140 kV. Phys. Med. Biol. 1989; 34(12):1871-1882.
  11. Grosswendt B. Dependences of the photon backscatter factor for water on source-to-phantom distance and irradiation field size. Phys. Med. Biol. 1990; 35(9):1233-1245.
  12. Kato H. Method of calculating the backscatter factor for diagnostic x-rays using the differential backscatter factor. Jpn. J. Radiol. Technol. 2001; 57(12):1503-1510.
  13. Kato H, Minami K, Asada Y, Suzuki S. Analysis of scattered radiation in an irradiated body by means of the monte carlo simulation: Back-scatter factors of diagnostic x-rays in the incident surface which is not flat. Jpn. J. Radiol. Technol. 2016; 72(5):396-401.
  14. Yukihara EG, McKeever SWS. Optically stimulated luminescence fundamentals and applications. 1st Ed. Chichester, UK. John Wiley &Sons, Inc. 2011;129-140.
  15. Pradhan AS, Lee JI, Kim JL. Recent developments of optically stimulated luminescence materials and techniques for radiation dosimetry and clinical applications. Journal of Medical Physics. 2008;33(3):85-99.
  16. Jursinic PA. Characterization of optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters, OSLDs, for clinical dosimetric measurements. Med. Phys. 2007;34(12):4594-4604.
  17. Hayashi H, Nakagawa K, Okino H, Takegami K, Okazaki T, Kobayashi I. High accuracy measurements by consecutive readings of OSL dosimeter. Medical Imaging and Information Sciences. 2014;31(2):28-34.
  18. Nakagawa K, Hayashi H, Okino H, Takegami K, Okazaki T, Kobayashi I. Fabrication of annealing equipment for optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) Dosimeter. Jpn. J. Radiol. Technol. 2014;70(10):1135-1142.
  19. Reft CS. The energy dependence and dose response of a commercial optically stimulated luminescent detector for kilovoltage photon, megavoltage photon, and electron, proton, and carbon beams. Med. Phys. 2009;36(5):1690-1699.
  20. Lehmann J, Dunn L, Lye JE, Kenny JW, Alves AD, Cole A, Asena A, Kron T, Williams IM. Angular dependence of the response of the nanoDot OSLD system for measurements at depth in clinical megavoltage beams. Med. Phys. 2014;41(6):061712-1-9.
  21. Al-Senan RM, Hatab MR. Characteristics of an OSLD in the diagnostic energy range. Med. Phys. 2011;38(7):4396-4405.
  22. Valiyaparambil JV, Mallya SM. Characterization of an optically stimulated dosimeter for dentomaxillofacial dosimetry. Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod. 2011;112 (6):793-797.
  23. Endo A, Katoh T, Kobayashi I, Joshi R, Sur J, Okano T. Characterization of optically stimulated luminescence dosemeters to measure organ doses in diagnostic radiology. Dentomaxillofac. Rad. 2012;41(3):211-216.
  24. Endo A, Katoh T, Vasudeva SB, Kobayashi I, Okano T. A preliminary study to determine the diagnostic reference level using dose-area product for limited-area cone beam CT. Dentomaxillofac. Rad. 2013;42(4):20120097-1-6.
  25. Yukihara EG, Ruan C, Gasparian PBR, Clouse WJ, Kalavagunta C, Ahmad S. An optically stimulated luminescence system to measure dose profiles in x-ray computed tomography. Phys. Med. Biol. 2009;54(20):6337-6352.
  26. Gaspariian PBR, Ruan C, Ahmad S, Kalavagunta C, Cheng CY, Yukihara EG. Demonstrating the use of optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) for measurement of staff radiation exposure in interventional fluoroscopy and helmet output factors in radiosurgery. Radiat. Meas. 2010;45:677-680.
  27. Takegami K, Hayashi H, Nakagawa K, Okino H, Okazaki T, Kobayashi I. Measurement method of an exposed dose using the nanoDot dosimeter (EPOS). EPOS of European Congress of Radiology. Vienna, Austria. Mar. 4-8, 2015.
  28. Takegami K, Hayashi H, Okino H, Kimoto N, Maehata I, Kanazawa Y, Okazaki T, Kobayashi I. Practical calibration curve of small-type optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeter for evaluation of entrance-skin dose in the diagnostic X-ray. Radiol. Phys. Technol. 2015;8(2):286-294.
  29. Takegami K, Hayashi H, Okino H, Kimoto N, Maehata I, Kanazawa Y, Okazaki T, Hashizume T, Kobayashi I. Estimation of identification limit for a small-type OSL dosimeter on the medical images by measurement of X-ray spectra. Radiol. Phys. Technol. 2016;9(2):286-292.
  30. Takegami K, Hayashi H, Konishi Y, Fukuda I. Development of multistage collimator for narrow beam production using filter guides of diagnostic X-ray equipment and improvement of apparatuses for practical training. Med. Imaging Inf. Sci. 2013; 30(4):101-107.
  31. Hirayama H, Namito Y, Bielajew AF, Wilderman SJ, Nelson WR. The EGS5 code system. KEK Report 2005-8. 2005;1-441.
  32. Okino H, Hayashi H, Nakagawa K, Takegami K. Measurement of response function of CdTe detector using diagnostic x-ray equipment and evaluation of monte carlo simulation code. Jpn. J. Radiol. Technol. 2014;70(12):1381-1391.
  33. Hubbell JH, Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorption coefficients. The International J. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 1982; 33(11): 1269-90.
  34. Birch R, Marshall M. Computation of bremsstrahlung X-ray spectra and comparison with spectra measured with a Ge(Li) detector. Phys. Med. Biol. 1979;29(3):505-517.

Cited by

  1. Assessment of scatter radiation dose and absorbed doses in eye lens and thyroid gland during digital breast tomosynthesis pp.15269914, 2018,