No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The feasibility of a regional CTDIvol
to estimate organ dose from tube current modulated CT exams
1. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, “Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States,” NCRP Report No. 160 (Bethesda, MD, 2009).
2. F. A. Mettler Jr., B. R. Thomadsen, M. Bhargavan, D. B. Gilley, J. E. Gray, J. A. Lipoti, J. McCrohan, T. T. Yoshizumi, and M. Mahesh, “Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: Preliminary results,” Health Phys. 95, 502–507 (2008).
7. C. H. McCollough, S. Leng, L. Yu, D. D. Cody, J. M. Boone, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “CT dose index and patient dose: They are not the same thing,” Radiology 259, 311–316 (2011).
8. J. M. Boone, K. J. Strauss, D. D. Cody, C. McCollough, M. McNitt-Gray, and T. L. Toth, “Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations,” AAPM Report No. 204 (AAPM, College Park, MD, 2011).
9. T. B. Shope, R. M. Gagne, and G. C. Johnson, “A method for describing the doses delivered by transmission x-ray computed tomography,” Med. Phys. 8, 488–495 (1981).
11. C. H. McCollough, “It is time to retire the computed tomography dose index (CTDI) for CT quality assurance and dose optimization: Against the proposition,” Med. Phys. 33, 1189–1191 (2006).
13. M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, T. L. Toth, B. Schmidt, B. L. Westerman, H. T. Morgan, and S. Saini, “Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT,” Radiology 233, 649–657 (2004).
14. C. H. McCollough, M. R. Bruesewitz, and J. M. Kofler Jr., “CT dose reduction and dose management tools: Overview of available options,” Radiographics 26, 503–512 (2006).
15. W. A. Kalender, H. Wolf, C. Suess, M. Gies, H. Greess, and W. A. Bautz, “Dose reduction in CT by on-line tube current control: Principles and validation on phantoms and cadavers,” Eur. Radiol. 9, 323–328 (1999).
16. W. A. Kalender, H. Wolf, and C. Suess, “Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. II. Phantom measurements,” Med. Phys. 26, 2248–2253 (1999).
17. H. Greess, H. Wolf, U. Baum, M. Lell, M. Pirkl, W. Kalender, and W. A. Bautz, “Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: Evaluation of six anatomical regions,” Eur. Radiol. 10, 391–394 (2000).
18. E. Angel, N. Yaghmai, C. M. Jude, J. J. Demarco, C. H. Cagnon, J. G. Goldin, A. N. Primak, D. M. Stevens, D. D. Cody, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Monte Carlo simulations to assess the effects of tube current modulation on breast dose for multidetector CT,” Phys. Med. Biol. 54, 497–512 (2009).
19. International Electrotechnical Commission, “Medical electrical equipment, part 2-44: Particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for computed tomography,” IEC Publication No. 60601-2-44 Amd.1 Ed.3 (IEC, Geneva Switzerland, 2012).
20. W. He, W. Huda, D. Magill, E. Tavrides, and H. Yao, “X-ray tube current modulation and patient doses in chest CT,” Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 143, 81–87 (2011).
21. H. Schlattl, M. Zankl, J. Becker, and C. Hoeschen, “Dose conversion coefficients for CT examinations of adults with automatic tube current modulation,” Phys. Med. Biol. 55, 6243–6261 (2010).
22. H. Schlattl, M. Zankl, J. Becker, and C. Hoeschen, “Dose conversion coefficients for paediatric CT examinations with automatic tube current modulation,” Phys. Med. Biol. 57, 6309–6326 (2012).
23. M. Gies, W. A. Kalender, H. Wolf, and C. Suess, “Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. I. Simulation studies,” Med. Phys. 26, 2235–2247 (1999).
24. G. Jarry, J. J. DeMarco, U. Beifuss, C. H. Cagnon, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A Monte Carlo-based method to estimate radiation dose from spiral CT: From phantom testing to patient-specific models,” Phys. Med. Biol. 48, 2645–2663 (2003).
25. J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, C. H. McCollough, J. O’Daniel, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A Monte Carlo based method to estimate radiation dose from multidetector CT (MDCT): Cylindrical and anthropomorphic phantoms,” Phys. Med. Biol. 50, 3989–4004 (2005).
26. J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, C. H. McCollough, M. Zankl, E. Angel, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Estimating radiation doses from multidetector CT using Monte Carlo simulations: Effects of different size voxelized patient models on magnitudes of organ and effective dose,” Phys. Med. Biol. 52, 2583–2597 (2007).
27. A. C. Turner, D. Zhang, H. J. Kim, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, E. Angel, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, A. N. Primak, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A method to generate equivalent energy spectra and filtration models based on measurement for multidetector CT Monte Carlo dosimetry simulations,” Med. Phys. 36, 2154–2164 (2009).
28. E. Waters, “MCNPX Version 2.5.C,” Los Alamos National Laboratory Report No. LA-UR-03-2202 (LANL, Los Alamos, NM, 2003).
29. E. Waters, “MCNPX User's Manual, Version 2.4.0,” Los Alamos National Laboratory Report No. LA-CP-02-408 (LANL, Los Alamos, NM, 2002).
30. ICRU, “Tissue substitutes in radiation dosimetry and measurement,” The International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Report No. 44 (ICRU, Bethesda, MD, 1989).
31. E. Angel, C. V. Wellnitz, M. M. Goodsitt, N. Yaghmai, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, J. W. Sayre, D. D. Cody, D. M. Stevens, A. N. Primak, C. H. McCollough, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “Radiation dose to the fetus for pregnant patients undergoing multidetector CT imaging: Monte Carlo simulations estimating fetal dose for a range of gestational age and patient size,” Radiology 249, 220–227 (2008).
32. J. J. DeMarco, T. D. Solberg, and J. B. Smathers, “A CT-based Monte Carlo simulation tool for dosimetry planning and analysis,” Med. Phys. 25, 1–11 (1998).
33. M. Khatonabadi, D. Zhang, K. Mathieu, H. J. Kim, P. Lu, D. Cody, J. J. DeMarco, C. H. Cagnon, and M. F. McNitt-Gray, “A comparison of methods to estimate organ doses in CT when utilizing approximations to the tube current modulation function,” Med. Phys. 39, 5212–5228 (2012).
34. B. Li, R. H. Behrman, and A. M. Norbash, “Comparison of topogram-based body size indices for CT dose consideration and scan protocol optimization,” Med. Phys. 39, 3456–3465 (2012).
35. J. Wang, X. Duan, J. A. Christner, S. Leng, L. Yu, and C. H. McCollough, “Attenuation-based estimation of patient size for the purpose of size specific dose estimation in CT. Part I. Development and validation of methods using the CT image,” Med. Phys. 39, 6764–6771 (2012).
36. J. Wang, J. A. Christner, X. Duan, S. Leng, L. Yu, and C. H. McCollough, “Attenuation-based estimation of patient size for the purpose of size specific dose estimation in CT. Part II. Implementation on abdomen and thorax phantoms using cross sectional CT images and scanned projection radiograph images,” Med. Phys. 39, 6772–6778 (2012).
38. A. Sodickson, G. I. Warden, C. E. Farkas, I. Ikuta, L. M. Prevedello, K. P. Andriole, and R. Khorasani, “Exposing exposure: Automated anatomy-specific CT radiation exposure extraction for quality assurance and radiation monitoring,” Radiology 264, 397–405 (2012).
40. X. Jia, H. Yan, L. Cervino, M. Folkerts, and S. B. Jiang, “A GPU tool for efficient, accurate, and realistic simulation of cone beam CT projections,” Med. Phys. 39, 7368–7378 (2012).
41. W. Chen, D. Kolditz, M. Beister, R. Bohle, and W. A. Kalender, “Fast on-site Monte Carlo tool for dose calculations in CT applications,” Med. Phys. 39, 2985–2996 (2012).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month