Literature DB >> 21701008

Body CT: technical advances for improving safety.

Daniele Marin1, Rendon C Nelson, Geoffrey D Rubin, Sebastian T Schindera.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this review, we attempt to address many of the issues that are related to ensuring patient benefit in body CT, balancing the use of ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast media. We attempt to not only summarize the literature but also make recommendations relevant to CT protocols, including the technical parameters of both the scanner and the associated contrast media.
CONCLUSION: Although CT is a powerful tool that has transformed the practice of medicine, the benefits are accompanied by important risks. Radiologists must understand these risks and the strategies available to minimize them as well as the risks associated with contrast medium delivery in abdominal CT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21701008     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6755

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  10 in total

1.  Age estimation for forensic purposes in Italy: ethical issues.

Authors:  Martina Focardi; Vilma Pinchi; Federica De Luca; Gian-Aristide Norelli
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2014-03-16       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; Meghan G Lubner; David H Kim; Jie Tang; Julie A Ruma; Alejandro Muñoz del Rio; Guang-Hong Chen
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Observer Performance in the Detection and Classification of Malignant Hepatic Nodules and Masses with CT Image-Space Denoising and Iterative Reconstruction.

Authors:  Joel G Fletcher; Lifeng Yu; Zhoubo Li; Armando Manduca; Daniel J Blezek; David M Hough; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Gregory C Brickner; Joseph C Cernigliaro; Amy K Hara; Jeff L Fidler; David S Lake; Maria Shiung; David Lewis; Shuai Leng; Kurt E Augustine; Rickey E Carter; David R Holmes; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  Tools in the assessment of sarcopenia.

Authors:  C Cooper; R Fielding; M Visser; L J van Loon; Y Rolland; E Orwoll; K Reid; S Boonen; W Dere; S Epstein; B Mitlak; Y Tsouderos; A A Sayer; R Rizzoli; J Y Reginster; J A Kanis
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Splenic lacerations and return to play: case report of 2 professional hockey players.

Authors:  Matthew L Silvis; Michael J Plakke; Joshua G Tice; Kevin P Black
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.843

6.  The presence of contrast agent increases organ radiation dose in contrast-enhanced CT.

Authors:  Mahta Mazloumi; Gert Van Gompel; Veerle Kersemans; Johan de Mey; Nico Buls
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-03-30       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Comparison of Rhenium and Iodine as Contrast Agents in X-Ray Imaging.

Authors:  José Carlos De La Vega; Pedro Luis Esquinas; Jovan Kaur Gill; Selin Jessa; Bradford Gill; Yogesh Thakur; Katayoun Saatchi; Urs O Häfeli
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.161

8.  Translation of atherosclerotic plaque phase-contrast CT imaging from synchrotron radiation to a conventional lab-based X-ray source.

Authors:  Tobias Saam; Julia Herzen; Holger Hetterich; Sandra Fill; Marian Willner; Marco Stockmar; Klaus Achterhold; Irene Zanette; Timm Weitkamp; Ulrich Schüller; Sigrid Auweter; Silvia Adam-Neumair; Konstantin Nikolaou; Maximilian F Reiser; Franz Pfeiffer; Fabian Bamberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Adaptive iterative dose reduction algorithm in CT: effect on image quality compared with filtered back projection in body phantoms of different sizes.

Authors:  Milim Kim; Jeong Min Lee; Jeong Hee Yoon; Hyoshin Son; Jin Woo Choi; Joon Koo Han; Byung Ihn Choi
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 3.500

10.  More holes, more contrast? Comparing an 18-gauge non-fenestrated catheter with a 22-gauge fenestrated catheter for cardiac CT.

Authors:  Andreas Marco Fischer; Philipp Riffel; Thomas Henzler; U Joseph Schoepf; Andres F Abadia; Richard Robert Bayer; Holger Haubenreisser; Dante Giovagnoli; Alexander Kremer; Stefan O Schoenberg; Joshua Gawlitza
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.