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


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Moore, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Olivieri-Fitt, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moore, W. H.
Right arrow Articles by Olivieri-Fitt, R.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.05.1491
AJR 2006; 187:W498-W502
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Comparison of MDCT Radiation Dose: A Phantom Study

William H. Moore1, Michael Bonvento1 and Rosemarie Olivieri-Fitt1

1 All authors: Department of Radiology, Stony Brook University, University Hospital HSC Level 4, Room 120, Stony Brook, NY 11794.

OBJECTIVE. Recently there has been a significant increase in the use of CT imaging resulting in a significant increase in radiation exposure to the population. Few studies have compared the degree of radiation exposure among the currently available MDCT units. Our objective is to make such a comparison.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Using a Rando anthropomorphic phantom, we placed thermoluminescent dosimeters into the center, anterior, and lateral aspect of the lower chest of the phantom. Standard CT of the chest was performed with the current protocols used at our institution on 4-, 8-, and 16-MDCT GE Healthcare systems. Next, near-identical CT scans of the entire chest were performed on the same CT systems.

RESULTS. The 4-detector array showed statistically significantly higher radiation dose compared with the 16-detector array with near-identical technique (p < 0.01). There is a trend toward decreasing radiation dose with the increasing number of detectors using both standard and near-identical technique. An inverse relationship exists between measured radiation dose and the number of detectors.

CONCLUSION. We theorize that as the number of detectors increases, there is a decrease in the amount of nonutilized radiation exposure, thus resulting in a lower total radiation dose.

Keywords: CT technique • MDCT • radiation dose • radiation exposure


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
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
J.S.P. Tan, K.-L. Tan, J.C.L. Lee, C.-M. Wan, J.-L. Leong, and L.-L. Chan
Comparison of Eye Lens Dose on Neuroimaging Protocols between 16- and 64-Section Multidetector CT: Achieving the Lowest Possible Dose
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., February 1, 2009; 30(2): 373 - 377.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.