HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Huda, W. Articles by Vance, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Huda, W. Articles by Vance, A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Patient Radiation Doses from Adult and Pediatric CT

¹ Department of Radiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, 750 E Adams St., Syracuse, NY 13210-2306.
² Present address: Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 1 —Mean section dose (D m) versus cylindric water phantom radius for a HiSpeed Advantage CT scanner (GE Healthcare) operated at 120 kV.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 2 —Values of relative mean section dose (R kV) for HiSpeed Advantage scanner (GE Healthcare) normalized to unity at 120 kV, versus X-ray tube voltage for water cylinders with radius of 20 (dashed line), 60 (dotted line), and 200 (solid line) mm.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 3 —Effective dose per unit energy imparted, E / , versus patient weight for head (solid line) and body (dashed line) CT examinations.

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 4 —Mean section dose (Dm) versus patient weight for an average of five MDCT systems listed in Table 2 operated at 120 kV for CT examinations of head (solid line), chest (dotted line), and abdomen (dashed line), where curves are least square fits to a secondorder polynomial.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 5A —Radiation doses versus patient age for head CT examinations based on protocol in Table 3 for average of five MDCT systems listed in Table 2 operated at 120 kV. Curves are least square fits to a second-order polynomial. Graphs show organ (absorbed) (A) and effective (B) doses.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 5B —Radiation doses versus patient age for head CT examinations based on protocol in Table 3 for average of five MDCT systems listed in Table 2 operated at 120 kV. Curves are least square fits to a second-order polynomial. Graphs show organ (absorbed) (A) and effective (B) doses.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 6A —Radiation doses versus patient weight for body CT based on protocol in Table 3 for average of five MDCT systems listed in Table 2 operated at 120 kV for chest (dotted line) and abdomen (dashed line), where curves are least square fits to a second-order polynomial. Graphs show organ (absorbed) (A) and effective (B) doses.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide]   Fig. 6B —Radiation doses versus patient weight for body CT based on protocol in Table 3 for average of five MDCT systems listed in Table 2 operated at 120 kV for chest (dotted line) and abdomen (dashed line), where curves are least square fits to a second-order polynomial. Graphs show organ (absorbed) (A) and effective (B) doses.

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati