Low-dose CT in clinical diagnostics

Bibliography

• Boone JM. Multidetector CT opportunities, challenges, and concerns associated with scanners with 64 or more detector rows. Radiology 2006;241:334-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berrington de González A, Mahesh M, Kim K, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2071-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metler FA, Thomadsen BR, Bhargavan M, et al. Medical radiation exposure in the US in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 2008;95(5):502-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Preston DL, et al. Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950-1990. Radiat Res 1996;146(1):1-27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kathren RL. Pathway to a paradigm: the linear non-threshold dose-response model in historical context. The American Academy of Health Physics 1995; Radiology Centennial Hartman Oration. Health Phys 1996;70(5):621-35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vardhanabhuti V, Loader RJ, Mitchel GR, et al. Image quality assessment of standard- and low-dose chest CT using filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and novel model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;200(3):545-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalra MK, Maher MM, Blake MA, et al. Detection and characterization of lesions on low-radiation-dose abdominal CT images post processed with noise reduction filters. Radiology 2004;232(3):791-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang K, Wang L, Li R, et al. Effect of low tube voltage on image quality, radiation dose, and low-contrast detectability at abdominal multidetector CT: phantom study. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012;2012:130169; doi: 10.1155/2012/130169
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(3):713-19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA Physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002;22(6):1541-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huda W, Magill D, He W. CT effective dose per dose length product using ICRP 103 weighting factors. Med Phys 2011;38:1261-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. Task Group 204. American Association of Physicists in Medicine; College Park, MD: 2011
   Google Scholar
• Brady SL, Kaufman RA. Investigation of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine report 204: size-specific dose estimates for pediatric CT implementation. Radiology 2012;265(3):832-40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huda W. CT dose metrics. Radiology 2013;267(6):964-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huda W, Sterzik A, Tipnis S, Schoepf UJ. Organ doses to adult patients for chest CT. Med Phys 2010;37(2):842-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinerman RA. Cancer risks following diagnostic and therapeutic radiation exposure in children. Pediatr Radiol 2006;36(Suppl 2):121-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Amis SE Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4(5):272-84
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Portnoy O, Guranda L, Apter S, et al. Optimization of 64-MDCT urography: effect of dual-phase imaging with furosemide on collecting system opacification and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197(5):W882-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luke FE, Allen BC, Moshiri ST, et al. Multiphase multi-detector row computed tomography in the setting of chronic liver disease and orthotopic liver transplantation: can a series be eliminated in order to reduce radiation dose? J Comput Assit Tomogr 2013;37(3):408-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macari M, Chandarana H, Schmidt B, et al. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: can the arterial phase at CT evaluation after endovascular repair be eliminated to reduce radiation dose? Radiology 2006;241(3):908-14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brook OR, Gourtsoyianni S, Brook A, et al. Split-bolus spectral multidetector CT of the pancreas: assessment of radiation dose and tumor conspicuity. Radiology 2013; doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121409 [Accessed 18 May 2013]
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulkarni NV, Uppot RN, Eisner BH, Sahani DV. Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: how low can we go? Radiology 2012;265(1):158-66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, et al. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:764-71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker ME, Dong F, Primak A, et al. Contrast-to-noise ratio and low-contrast object resolution on full- and low-dose MDCT: SAFIRE versus filtered back projection in a low-contrast object phantom and in the liver. Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:8-18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rizzo S, Kalra M, Schmidt B, et al. Comparison of angular and combined automatic tube current modulation techniques with constant tube current CT of the abdomen and pelvis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186(3):673-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahesh M. Advances in CT technology and applications to pediatric imaging. Pediatric Radiol 2011;41(suppl 2):493-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Habibzadeh MA, Ay MR, AsI AR, et al. Impact of miscentering on patient dose and image noise in x-ray CT imaging: phantom and clinical studies. Phys Med 2012;28:191-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanal KM, Stewart BK, Kolokythas B, Shuman WP. Impact of operator-selected image noise index and reconstruction slice thickness on patient radiation dose in 64-MDCT. Am J Roentgenol 2007;189(1):219-25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalva SP, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, Saini S. Using the K-edge to improve contrast conspicuity and to lower radiation dose with a 16-MDCT: a phantom and human study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006;30:391-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu L, Li H, Fletcher JG, McCollough CH. Automatic selection of tube potential for radiation dose reduction in CT: a general strategy. Med Phys 2010;37:234-43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee KH, Lee JM, Moon SK, et al. Attenuation-based automatic tube voltage selection and tube current modulation for dose reduction at contrast-enhanced liver CT. Radiology 2012;265(2):437-47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ, Dowe D, Jollis JG, et al. Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52(21):1724-32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64 detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008;248(2):431-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budoff MJ. Maximizing dose reduction with cardiac CT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;25(Suppl 2):279-87
   Google Scholar
• Lu B, Mao SS, Zhuang N, et al. Coronary artery motion during the cardiac cycle and optimal ECG triggering for coronary artery imaging. Invest Radiol 2001;36(5):250-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noël PB, Fingerle AA, Renger B, et al. Initial performance characterization of a clinical noise-suppressing reconstruction algorithm for MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:1404-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalra MK, Woisetschläger M, Dahlström N, et al. Radiation dose reduction with Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction technique for abdominal computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2012;36:339-46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. Abdominal CT with modeled-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:1266-74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR V) NRC. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. National Academies Press; Washington (DC): 1990
   Google Scholar
• Supanich M, Peck D. Size-specific dose estimate as an indicator of absorbed organ dose in CT abdomen and pelvis studies (abstract). In: radiological Society of North American scientific assembly and annual meeting program [book online]. Oak Brook, Ill, Radiological Society of North America, 2012
   Google Scholar
• Brink JA, Morin RL, Size-specific dose estimation for CT. How should it be used and what does it mean? Radiology 2012;265:666-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar