Patient dose and image quality from the low kilovoltage dynamic liver computed tomography examinations

1. Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock P. Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and continuous scanner rotation. Radiology. 1990; 176:181-3.10.1148/radiology.176.1.23530882353088Search in Google Scholar

2. Kalender WA, Polacin A. Physical performance characteristics of spiral CT scanning. Med Phys. 1991; 18:910-5.10.1118/1.5966071961153Search in Google Scholar

3. Remy-Jardin M, Remy J, Mayo JR, Muller NL. Acquisition, injection, and reconstruction techniques. In: CT angiography of the chest. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2001.Search in Google Scholar

4. Berland LL, Smith JK. Multidetector-array CT:once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology.1998; 209:327-9.10.1148/radiology.209.2.98075559807555Search in Google Scholar

5. Choi JH, Cha SH, Lee KY, Shin DC, Kang JH, Kim YH, et al. The development of a guidance level for patient dose for CT examinations in Korea. Radiation Protection. Dosimetry. 2009; 138:137-43.10.1093/rpd/ncp23619864327Search in Google Scholar

6. Mettler FA Jr, Wiest PW, Locken JA, KelseyCA. CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot. 2000; 20:353-9.10.1088/0952-4746/20/4/30111140709Search in Google Scholar

7. Shrimpton PC, Jones DG, Hillier MC, Wall BF, Le Heron JC, Faulkner K. Survey of CT practice in the UK. II. Dosimetric aspects. 1991; NRPB report no. R-249. Chilton, England: National Radiological Protection Board 1991.Search in Google Scholar

8. Shrimpton PC, Edyvean S. CT scanner Dosimetry Br J Radiol. 1998; 71:1-3.Search in Google Scholar

9. Anthony SJ, Barnes GT, Gould RG. Specification, acceptance testing and quality control of diagnostic x-ray imaging equipment Medical physics monograph No. 20. 1991: 899-936.Search in Google Scholar

10. Gray JE. Radiological protection issue in mammography and computed tomography proc. conf. (Vienna : IAEA) 2001; 183-200.Search in Google Scholar

11. Mini RL, Vock P, Mury R, Schneeberger P. Radiation exposure of patients who undergo CT of the trunk. Radiology. 1995; 195:557-62.10.1148/radiology.195.2.77247837724783Search in Google Scholar

12. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Mukundan S Jr, Paulson EK, Jaffe TA, Miller CM, et al. Hypervascular liver tumors: low tube voltage, high tube current multi-detector row CT for enhanced detection-phantom study. Radiology. 2008; 246:125-32.10.1148/radiol.246107030718096533Search in Google Scholar

13. Yanaga Y, Awai K, Nakaura T, Utsunomiya D, Funama Y, Date S, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients weighing 70 kg or less: initial trial of compact-bolus dynamic CT with low-dose contrast material at 80 kVp. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196: 1324-31.10.2214/AJR.10.454521606296Search in Google Scholar

14. Funama Y, Awai K, Nakayama Y, Nagasue N, Shimamura M, et al. Radiation dose reduction without degradation of low-contrast detectability at abdominal multisection CT with a low-tube voltage technique: phantom study. Radiology. 2005; 237:905-10.10.1148/radiol.237304164316237139Search in Google Scholar

15. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, Hatemura M, Imuta M, Nakaura T, et al. Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology. 2005; 237:945-51.10.1148/radiol.237304165516237140Search in Google Scholar

16. Haslam DW, James WP. Obesity. Lancet. 2005; 366: 1197-209.10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67483-1Search in Google Scholar

17. The Health and Welfare Enforcement Ordinance 349. The Regulations on Safety Management of Radiation Generating Equipment for Diagnosis. (Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare) Radiation Safety Series No. 13. 2007.Search in Google Scholar

18. The Health and Welfare Enforcement Ordinance 386. The Regulations on Installation, Operation and Quality Management of Special Medical Equipment of the Special. (Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare) Radiation Safety Series No. 13. 2007.Search in Google Scholar

19. Ckanatsios NA, Huda W, Peters KR. Effect of radiographic techniques (kVp and mAs) on image quality and patient doses in digital subtraction angiography. Med Phys. 2002; 29:1643-50.10.1118/1.149321312201409Search in Google Scholar

20. Cardinal HN, Holdsworth DW, Drangova M, Hobbs BB, Fenster A. Experimental and theoretical X-ray imaging performance comparison of iodine and lanthanide contrast agents. Med Phys.1993; 226: 15-31.10.1118/1.5971348455493Search in Google Scholar

21. Hamberg LM, Rhea JT, Hunter GJ, Thrall JH. Multidetector row CT: radiation dose characteristics. Radiology. 2003; 226:762-72.10.1148/radiol.226302020512616020Search in Google Scholar

22. Kalva SP, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, Saini S. Using the K-edge to improve contrast conspicuity and to lower radiation dose with a 16-MDCT: a phantom and human study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006; 30: 391-7.10.1097/00004728-200605000-0000816778612Search in Google Scholar

23. Foley WD, Mallisee TA, Hohenwalter MD, Wilson CR, Quiroz FA, Taylor AJ. Multiphase hepatic CT with a multirow detector CT scanner. AJR. 2000; 175: 679-85.10.2214/ajr.175.3.175067910954450Search in Google Scholar

24. Kanematsu M, Goshima S, Kondo H, Nishibori H, Kato H, Yokoyama R, et al. Oprimizing scan delays of fixed duration contrast injection in contrast-enhanced biphasic multidetector-row CT for the liver and the detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma. J omput Assist Tomogr. 2005; 29:195-201.10.1097/01.rct.0000155062.50236.5915772536Search in Google Scholar