Literature DB >> 16418863

Effective radiation doses in CT colonography: results of an inventory among research institutions.

Sebastiaan Jensch1, Rogier E van Gelder, Henk W Venema, Johannes B Reitsma, Patrick M M Bossuyt, Johan S Laméris, Jaap Stoker.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to estimate the effective dose that is currently used in CT colonography using scan parameters that were collected for this purpose, and to investigate trends in time. PubMed was systematically searched from 1996 until January 2004 for studies investigating CT colonography. Research institutions were contacted and asked for their current scan protocol. Thirty-six institutions published 74 studies. Twenty-eight of the 36 institutions provided their current protocol. The median effective dose in 2004 was 5.1 mSv (range 1.2-11.7 mSv) per position. Most institutions (93%) scan in both the supine and prone positions. The median mAs value was 67 mAs (range 20-200), median collimation was 2.5 mm (range 0.75-5). From 1996 until 2004 a significant decrease in mAs and collimation (P=0.006, P<0.0001, respectively) was observed, while institutions that used a multislice scanner increased (P<0.0001). The effective dose remained constant (P=0.76). In 2004 the median effective dose for a complete CT colonography was 10.2 mSv. Despite the increasing use of multislice scanners, which are slightly less dose-efficient, the median effective dose remained approximately constant between 1996 and 2004. This is mainly caused by the use of lower mAs settings.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16418863     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-005-0047-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  26 in total

1.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; J Richard Choi; Inku Hwang; James A Butler; Michael L Puckett; Hans A Hildebrandt; Roy K Wong; Pamela A Nugent; Pauline A Mysliwiec; William R Schindler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-12-01       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de González; Sarah Darby
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-01-31       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 3.  Scanning protocols for multislice CT scanners.

Authors:  E Kulama
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  CT colonography with fecal tagging after incomplete colonoscopy.

Authors:  S Gryspeerdt; P Lefere; M Herman; R Deman; L Rutgeerts; G Ghillebert; F Baert; M Baekelandt; B Van Holsbeeck
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  The LNT model provides the best approach for practical implementation of radiation protection.

Authors:  C J Martin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Radiation risk is linear with dose at low doses.

Authors:  K H Chadwick; H P Leenhouts
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  CT scanner dosimetry.

Authors:  P C Shrimpton; S Edyvean
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 8.  Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT.

Authors:  Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Bernhard Schmidt; Bryan L Westerman; Hugh T Morgan; Sanjay Saini
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia.

Authors:  Peter B Cotton; Valerie L Durkalski; Benoit C Pineau; Yuko Y Palesch; Patrick D Mauldin; Brenda Hoffman; David J Vining; William C Small; John Affronti; Douglas Rex; Kenyon K Kopecky; Susan Ackerman; J Steven Burdick; Cecelia Brewington; Mary A Turner; Alvin Zfass; Andrew R Wright; Revathy B Iyer; Patrick Lynch; Michael V Sivak; Harold Butler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-04-14       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy.

Authors:  Riccardo Iannaccone; Andrea Laghi; Carlo Catalano; James A Brink; Filippo Mangiapane; Simona Trenna; Francesca Piacentini; Roberto Passariello
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  7 in total

1.  A comparison of primary two- and three-dimensional methods to review CT colonography.

Authors:  Rogier E van Gelder; Jasper Florie; C Yung Nio; Sebastiaan Jensch; Steven W de Jager; Frans M Vos; Henk W Venema; Joep F Bartelsman; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Johan S Laméris; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Current status of CT colonography.

Authors:  Suzanne M Frentz; Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  [CT colonography: patient preparation and examination technique].

Authors:  P Lefere; S Gryspeerdt; T Mang
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Radiation dose in CT colonography--trends in time and differences between daily practice and screening protocols.

Authors:  M H Liedenbaum; H W Venema; J Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Virtual colonoscopy: Utility, impact and overview.

Authors:  Dhakshina Ganeshan; Khaled M Elsayes; David Vining
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2013-03-28

6.  The effect of dose reduction and feasibility of edge-preserving noise reduction on the detection of liver lesions using MSCT.

Authors:  Johannes Wessling; Rainer Esseling; Rainer Raupach; Stefanie Fockenberg; Nani Osada; Joachim Gerss; Walter Heindel; Roman Fischbach
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  [Screening of colorectal neoplasm].

Authors:  G Layer; J F Riemann
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 0.635

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.