Reducing radiation exposure from survey CT scans

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 185, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 509-515

  O'Daniel, Jennifer C ^a   Stevens, Donna M ^a   Cody, Dianna D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION EXPOSURE; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; BODY SIZE; GENERAL APPARATUS, EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES; METHODOLOGY; RADIATION DOSE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADULT; BODY SIZE; CHILD; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; TOMOGRAPHY SCANNERS, X-RAY COMPUTED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 25644448940     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.185.2.01850509     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, et al. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR 2001; 176:289-296
2. Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS, et al. Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: strategies at a large children's hospital. AJR 2001; 176:303-306
3. Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF. Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR 2001; 176:297-301
4. Brenner DJ. Estimating cancer risks from pediatric CT: going from the qualitative to the quantitative. Pediatr Radiol 2002; 32:223-228: discussion 222-224
5. Frush DP. Pediatric CT: practical approach to diminish the radiation dose. Pediatr Radiol 2002; 32:714-717; discussion 751-714
6. Cody DD, Moxley DM, Krugh KT, et al. Strategies for formulating appropriate MDCT techniques when imaging the chest, abdomen, and pelvis in pediatric patients. AJR 2004; 182:849-859
7. Donnelly LF, Frush DP. Pediatric multidetector body CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41:637-655
8. Cohnen M, Fischer H, Hamacher J, et al. CT of the head by use of reduced current and kilovoltage: relationship between image quality and dose reduction. Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21:1654-1660
9. Rehani MM, Berry M. Radiation doses in computed tomography: the increasing doses of radiation need to be controlled. BMJ 2000; 320:593-594
10. Haaga JR. Radiation dose management: weighing risk versus benefit. AJR 2001; 177:289-291
11. Kalra MK, Prasad S, Saini S, et al. Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR 2002; 179:1101-1106
12. Frush DP. Responsible use of CT. Radiology 2003; 229:289-291
13. Katz DS, Venkataramanan N, Napel S, et al. Can low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT be used for routine evaluation of suspected renal colic? AJR 2003; 180:313-315
14. Rogers LF. Low-dose CT: how are we doing? AJR 2003; 180:303
15. Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Gevenois PA. Dose reduction in multidetector CT using attenuation-based online tube current modulation. AJR 2003; 181:331-334
16. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004; 230:619-628
17. Maher MM, Kalra MK, Toth TL, et al. Application of rational practice and technical advances for optimizing radiation dose for chest CT. J Thorac Imaging 2004; 19:16-23
18. Kaczmarek RV, Conway BJ, Slayton RO, et al. Results of a nationwide survey of chest radiography: comparison with results of a previous study. Radiology 2000; 215:891-896
19. Butler PF, Conway BJ, Suleiman OH, Koustenis GH, Showalter CK. Chest radiography: a survey of techniques and exposure levels currently used. Radiology 1985; 156:533-536