Radiation dose in abdominal computed tomography: The role of patient size and the selection of tube current

Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

Volumn 57, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 152-158

  Aldrich, John E ^a,b   Chang, Silvia D ^a   Bilawich, Ana Marie ^a   Mayo, John R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b VANCOUVER GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Effective dose; Radiation dose; Radiation effects

Indexed keywords

ABDOMEN; ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; RADIATION DOSE; SCORING SYSTEM;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; BODY WEIGHT; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 33745868679     PISSN: 08465371     EISSN: 08465371     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 2004;232:735-8.
2. Nickoloff EL, Alderson PO. Radiation exposures to patients from CT: reality, public perception and policy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:285-7.
3. Rehani MM, Berry M. Radiation doses in computed tomography. The increasing doses of radiation need to be controlled. BMJ 2000;320:593-4.
4. Mettler FA Jr, Wiest PW, Locken JA, Kelsey CA. CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot 2000;20:353-9.
5. Aldrich JE, Williams J. Change in patient doses from radiological examinations at the Vancouver General Hospital 19912002. Can Assoc Radiol J 2005;56:94-9.
6. Gonzalez AB, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic x-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 2004;363:345-51.
7. Golding SJ, Shrimpton PC. Commentary. Radiation dose in CT: are we meeting the challenge? Br J Radiol 2002;75:1-4.
8. Prokop M, Galanski M. Spiral and multislice CT of the body. New York (NY): Thieme; 2003.
9. Donnelly LF, Emery KH, Brody AS, Laor T, Gylys-Morin VM, jAnton CG, et al. Minimizing radiation dose for pediatric body applications of single-detector helical CT: strategies at a large children's hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:303-6.
10. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn MM. Doses from computed tomography (CT) examinations in the UK - 2003 review. National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) NRPB-W67. Chilcot (UK): NRPB; 2005.
11. Huda W, Scalzetti EM, Levin G. Technique factors and image quality as functions of patient weight at abdominal CT. Radiology 2000;217:430-5.
12. Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C, Gies M, Greess H, Bautz WA. Dose reduction in CT by on-line tube current control: principles and validation on phantoms and cadavers. Eur Radiol 1999;9:323-8.
13. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL,Hamberg, LM, Blake MA, Shepard JA, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619-28.
14. Mayo JR, Whittall KP, Leung AN, Hartman TE, Park CS, Primack SL, et al. Simulated dose reduction in conventional chest CT: validation study. Radiology 1997;202:453-7.
15. Frush DP. Strategies of dose reduction. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:293-7.
16. Mayo JR, Kim KI, MacDonald S, Johkoh T, Kavanagh P, Coxson HO, et al. Reduced radiation dose helical chest CT: effect on reader evaluation of structures and lung findings. Radiology 2004;232:749-56.