AJR Your Link to CME
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hernandez, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Goodsitt, M. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hernandez, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Goodsitt, M. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 167, 1247-1253, Copyright © 1996 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Reduction of radiation dose in pediatric patients using pulsed fluoroscopy

RJ Hernandez and MM Goodsitt
Department of Radiology, C. S. Mott Children's Hospital, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor 48109-0252, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if pulsed fluoroscopy reduces radiation exposure to pediatric patients undergoing conventional fluoroscopy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Four hundred one consecutive patients were nonrandomly divided into pulsed fluoroscopy and conventional fluoroscopy study groups. Two control groups were also assembled: 474 patients evaluated with conventional fluoroscopy before the study and 138 patients evaluated with pulsed fluoroscopy after the study. RESULTS: We found no difference in fluoroscopy times across the groups. Although the number of digital spot films was slightly higher for the pulsed fluoroscopy study group than for the conventional fluoroscopy study group, we found no difference in the number of digital spot films for the pulsed fluoroscopy study group and for the conventional fluoroscopy control group. Furthermore, the difference in the number of digital spot films was also insignificant for the pulsed fluoroscopy control group and the conventional fluoroscopy study group. The radiation exposure in the pulsed fluoroscopy study group was 50% lower (mean, 0.6 R) than in the conventional fluoroscopy study group. When using pulsed fluoroscopy in the 7.5 pulses-per-second mode, we were able to reduce radiation exposure by 75% of that from conventional fluoroscopy. CONCLUSION: Pulsed fluoroscopy reduces fluoroscopic radiation exposure to pediatric patients undergoing conventional fluoroscopy. Despite minor image degradation, pulsed fluoroscopy is the technique of choice at our institution.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
V. L. Ward, C. E. Barnewolt, K. J. Strauss, R. L. Lebowitz, V. Venkatakrishnan, M. Stehr, D. L. McLellan, C. A. Peters, D. Zurakowski, P. S. Dunning, et al.
Radiation Exposure Reduction during Voiding Cystourethrography in a Pediatric Porcine Model of Vesicoureteral Reflux
Radiology, January 1, 2006; 238(1): 96 - 106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
D. Papadopoulou, Em. Yakoumakis, P. Sandilos, V. Thanopoulos, Tr. Makri, G. Gialousis, D. Houndas, N. Yakoumakis, and Ev. Georgiou
Entrance radiation doses during paediatric cardiac catheterisations performed for diagnosis or the treatment of congenital heart disease
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 236 - 240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
B. Nikolic, J. B. Spies, M. J. Lundsten, and S. Abbara
Patient Radiation Dose Associated with Uterine Artery Embolization1
Radiology, January 1, 2000; 214(1): 121 - 125.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
T. Berrocal, I. Torres, J. Gutierrez, C. Prieto, M. L. del Hoyo, and M. Lamas
Congenital Anomalies of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract
RadioGraphics, July 1, 1999; 19(4): 855 - 872.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.