PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to create an adaptive computed tomography dose index (by volume) (CTDI vol) for pediatric patients that would be fitted to a patient's particular body weight and to compare the adaptive CTDI vol with the CTDI vol displayed on the screen of the CT console. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT images of 60 children whose body weights were known were available for calculating the total amount of modified CT numbers as an attenuation area. The attenuation area values of four differentsized acryl phantoms were also calculated. The dose measurements of all four phantoms were carried out. We combined the results of the abdominal CT and phantom experiments. The weight-based complementary ratio for adaptive CTDI vol was calculated, and the result was applied to an example of pediatric abdominal CT protocol. RESULTS: The adaptive CTDI vol was always larger than the displayed CTDI vol with both small and large fields of view (FOV). The adaptive CTDI vol was 2.2 times larger than the displayed CTDI vol in the maximum value with the large FOV and 1.2 times larger with the small FOV. CONCLUSION: We radiologists must be the child's advocate and protect children from the deleterious effects of any of our technologies, including a lower indication of CTDI vol on the screen of a CT console.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to create an adaptive computed tomography dose index (by volume) (CTDI vol) for pediatric patients that would be fitted to a patient's particular body weight and to compare the adaptive CTDI vol with the CTDI vol displayed on the screen of the CT console. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CT images of 60 children whose body weights were known were available for calculating the total amount of modified CT numbers as an attenuation area. The attenuation area values of four differentsized acryl phantoms were also calculated. The dose measurements of all four phantoms were carried out. We combined the results of the abdominal CT and phantom experiments. The weight-based complementary ratio for adaptive CTDI vol was calculated, and the result was applied to an example of pediatric abdominal CT protocol. RESULTS: The adaptive CTDI vol was always larger than the displayed CTDI vol with both small and large fields of view (FOV). The adaptive CTDI vol was 2.2 times larger than the displayed CTDI vol in the maximum value with the large FOV and 1.2 times larger with the small FOV. CONCLUSION: We radiologists must be the child's advocate and protect children from the deleterious effects of any of our technologies, including a lower indication of CTDI vol on the screen of a CT console.
Authors: L F Donnelly; K H Emery; A S Brody; T Laor; V M Gylys-Morin; C G Anton; S R Thomas; D P Frush Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: H Imhof; N Schibany; A Ba-Ssalamah; C Czerny; A Hojreh; F Kainberger; C Krestan; H Kudler; I Nöbauer; R Nowotny Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 3.528