Comparison of eye lens dose on neuroimaging protocols between 16- And 64-section multidetector CT: Achieving the lowest possible dose

American Journal of Neuroradiology

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 373-377

  Tan, J S P ^a   Tan, K L ^a   Lee, J C L ^b   Wan, C M ^a   Leong, J L ^a   Chan, L L ^a  

^a SINGAPORE GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Singapore)

^b DIVISION OF MEDICAL ONCOLOGY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; LENS; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NEUROIMAGING; PATIENT CARE; RADIATION DOSE; TEMPORAL BONE; THERMOLUMINESCENCE DOSIMETRY;

CADAVER; CALIBRATION; HUMANS; LENS, CRYSTALLINE; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION INJURIES; THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETRY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 60049099384     PISSN: 01956108     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A1327     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic x-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 2004;363:345-51
2. Ron E. Cancer risks from medical radiation. Health Phys 2003;85:47-59
3. Committee to Assess the Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. BEIRVII: health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Available at: http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt-briefs/beir- vii-final.pdf. Accessed September 22, 2008.
4. Hall EJ, Brenner DJ. Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. Br J Radiol 2008;81:362-78
5. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an in creasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84
6. Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4:272-84
7. Greess H, Wolf H, Baum U, et al. Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions. Eur Radiol 2000;10:391-94
8. Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C, et al. Dose reduction in CT by on-line tube current control: principles and validation on phantoms and cadavers. Eur Radiol 1999;9:323-28
9. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233:649-57
10. Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C, et al. Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenology 2006;187:695-701
11. Flohr TG, Stierstorfer K, Ulzheimer S, et al. Image reconstruction and image quality evaluation for a 64-slice CT scanner with z-flying focal spot. Med Phys 2005;32:2536-47
12. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Saba O, et al. Dose performance of a 64-channel dual-source CT scanner. Radiology 2007;243:775-84
13. Moore WH, Bonvento M, Olivieri-Fitt R. Comparison of MDCT radiation dose: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenology 2006;187:W498-502
14. Thornton FJ, Paulson EK, Yoshizumi TT, et al. Single versus multi-detector row CT: comparison of radiation doses and dose profiles. Acad Radiol 2003;10:379-85
15. Moro L, Bolsi A, Baldi M, et al. Single-slice and multi-slice computerized tomography: dosimetric comparison with diagnostic reference dose levels [in Italian]. Radiol Med (Torino) 2001;102:262-65
16. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619-28
17. Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, et al. Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 2005;237:213-23
18. Hein E, Rogalla P, Klingebiel R, et al. Low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses witheyelensprotection:effectonimagequalityandradiationdose.Eur Radiol 2002;12:1693-96