| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Pediatric Imaging |
1 From the Department of Radiology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Research Imaging Center, 4701 X St, Sacramento, CA 95817. Received April 25, 2002; revision requested June 21; final revision received September 24; accepted November 5. Supported in part by grants from the California Breast Cancer Research Program (7EB-0075) and the National Cancer Institute (R01-CA89260). Address correspondence to J.M.B. (e-mail: jmboone@ucdavis.edu).
PURPOSE: To determine size-dependent technique factors for pediatric computed tomography (CT) by using physically measured objective data.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six phantom cylinders (10–32 cm in diameter) were scanned with a clinical multi–detector row CT scanner. CT noise was statistically characterized for CT technique factors from 80 to 140 kVp and from 10 to 300 mAs. Dose measurements were performed with each phantom. Dilute iodine and tissue contrast were determined with computer calculations validated with measured data. The dose, noise, and contrast data were computer fit, and pediatric CT technique factors (milliampere seconds) necessary to maintain the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were computed.
RESULTS: As compared with that in a reference cylindric adult abdomen of 28 cm in diameter, CNR was maintained at a constant level in pediatric patients of 25, 20, and 15 cm in diameter, respectively, when milliampere second values of 0.557, 0.196, and 0.054 of the adult milliampere second values were used. The corresponding doses were reduced to 0.642, 0.287, and 0.090 of the 28-cm-diameter adult dose, respectively. CT techniques for examination of pediatric heads measuring 15 and 13 cm, respectively, can involve the use of milliampere second values of 0.572 and 0.366 of those used for examination of a standard 17-cm-diameter adult head.
CONCLUSION: CT technique charts for pediatric abdominal and head examinations were produced on the basis of physically measured data; use of these tables will enable pediatric radiation dose to be reduced while CNR is preserved.
© RSNA, 2003
Index terms: Abdomen, CT, 78.1211 • Computed tomography (CT), in infants and children • Computed tomography (CT), radiation exposure • Head, CT, 18.1211, 28.1211 • Radiations, exposure to patients and personnel
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. Herzog, D. M. Mulvihill, S. A. Nguyen, G. Savino, B. Schmidt, P. Costello, T. J. Vogl, and U. J. Schoepf Pediatric Cardiovascular CT Angiography: Radiation Dose Reduction Using Automatic Anatomic Tube Current Modulation Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1232 - 1240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. G. Eichhorn, C. Jourdan, S. L. Hill, S. V. Raman, J. P. Cheatham, and F. R. Long CT of Pediatric Vascular Stents Used to Treat Congenital Heart Disease Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1241 - 1246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Masciari, A. D. Van den Abbeele, L. R. Diller, I. Rastarhuyeva, J. Yap, K. Schneider, L. Digianni, F. P. Li, J. F. Fraumeni Jr, S. Syngal, et al. F18-Fluorodeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Screening in Li-Fraumeni Syndrome JAMA, March 19, 2008; 299(11): 1315 - 1319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Tubiana, S. Nagataki, L. E. Feinendegen, D. A. Dimitroyannis, D. P. Frush, M. J. Goske, M. Hernanz-Schulman, P. Soyer, H. Varnholt, D. J. Brenner, et al. Computed Tomography and Radiation Exposure N. Engl. J. Med., February 21, 2008; 358(8): 850 - 853. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. T. Schindera, R. C. Nelson, S. Mukundan Jr, E. K. Paulson, T. A. Jaffe, C. M. Miller, D. M. DeLong, K. Kawaji, T. T. Yoshizumi, and E. Samei Hypervascular Liver Tumors: Low Tube Voltage, High Tube Current Multi Detector Row CT for Enhanced Detection Phantom Study Radiology, December 1, 2007; 246(1): 125 - 132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Bohy, V. de Maertelaer, A. Roquigny, C. Keyzer, D. Tack, and P. A. Gevenois Multidetector CT in Patients Suspected of Having Lumbar Disk Herniation: Comparison of Standard-Dose and Simulated Low-Dose Techniques Radiology, August 1, 2007; 244(2): 524 - 531. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A J Van Der Molen, W J H Veldkamp, and J Geleijns 16-slice CT: achievable effective doses of common protocols in comparison with recent CT dose surveys Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2007; 80(952): 248 - 255. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P C Shrimpton, M C Hillier, M A Lewis, and M Dunn National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003 Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2006; 79(948): 968 - 980. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. C. Chan, B. N. Joe, F. V. Coakley, E. L. Prien Jr, R. G. Gould, S. Prevrhal, W. C. Barber, K. S. Kirkwood, A. Qayyum, and B. M. Yeh Gallstone Detection at CT in Vitro: Effect of Peak Voltage Setting. Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 546 - 553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. H. McCollough, M. R. Bruesewitz, and J. M. Kofler Jr CT Dose Reduction and Dose Management Tools: Overview of Available Options. RadioGraphics, March 1, 2006; 26(2): 503 - 512. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Funama, K. Awai, Y. Nakayama, K. Kakei, N. Nagasue, M. Shimamura, N. Sato, S. Sultana, S. Morishita, and Y. Yamashita Radiation Dose Reduction without Degradation of Low-Contrast Detectability at Abdominal Multisection CT with a Low-Tube Voltage Technique: Phantom Study Radiology, December 1, 2005; 237(3): 905 - 910. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. H. Mulkens, P. Bellinck, M. Baeyaert, D. Ghysen, X. Van Dijck, E. Mussen, C. Venstermans, and J.-L. Termote Use of an Automatic Exposure Control Mechanism for Dose Optimization in Multi-Detector Row CT Examinations: Clinical Evaluation Radiology, October 1, 2005; 237(1): 213 - 223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Boone What Parameters Are Most Accurate in Predicting Appropriate Technique Factors for CT Scanning? Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 377 - 378. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Menke Comparison of Different Body Size Parameters for Individual Dose Adaptation in Body CT of Adults Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 565 - 571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Ledenius, M. Gustavsson, S. Johansson, F. Stalhammar, J. Soderberg, L. M. Wiklund, and A. Thilander Klang A method of predicting the image noise in paediatric multi-slice computed tomography images Radiat Prot Dosimetry, May 17, 2005; 114(1-3): 313 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Irie and H. Inoue Individual Modulation of the Tube Current-Seconds to Achieve Similar Levels of Image Noise in Contrast-Enhanced Abdominal CT Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2005; 184(5): 1514 - 1518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. M. Fayad, P. Johnson, and E. K. Fishman Multidetector CT of Musculoskeletal Disease in the Pediatric Patient: Principles, Techniques, and Clinical Applications RadioGraphics, May 1, 2005; 25(3): 603 - 618. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Siegel, B. Schmidt, D. Bradley, C. Suess, and C. Hildebolt Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Pediatric CT: Effect of Technical Factors and Phantom Size and Shape Radiology, November 1, 2004; 233(2): 515 - 522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
