Comparison of Image Quality and Radiation Dose between Fixed Tube Current and Combined Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Craniocervical CT Angiography

References

1. 1.↵
   1. de Monye C,
   2. Cademartiri F,
   3. de Weert TT,
   4. et al

   . Sixteen-detector row CT angiography of carotid arteries: comparison of different volumes of contrast material with and without a bolus chaser. Radiology 2005;237:555–62

   PubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Sahani DV,
   2. Kalva SP,
   3. Hahn PF,
   4. et al

   . 16-MDCT angiography in living kidney donors at various tube potentials: impact on image quality and radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:115–20

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Teksam M,
   2. McKinney A,
   3. Casey S,
   4. et al

   . Multi-section CT angiography for detection of cerebral aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:1485–92

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Cohnen M,
   2. Wittsack HJ,
   3. Assadi S,
   4. et al

   . Radiation exposure of patients in comprehensive computed tomography of the head in acute stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:1741–45

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Jayakrishnan VK,
   2. White PM,
   3. Aitken D,
   4. et al

   . Subtraction helical CT angiography of intra- and extracranial vessels: technical considerations and preliminary experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:451–55

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Lell MM,
   2. Anders K,
   3. Uder M,
   4. et al

   . New techniques in CT angiography. Radiographics 2006;26:S45–S62

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Russell MT,
   2. Fink JR,
   3. Rebeles F,
   4. et al

   . Balancing radiation dose and imaging quality: clinical applications of neck volume CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:727–31

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Tubiana M,
   2. Aurengo A,
   3. Averbeck D,
   4. et al

   . The debate on the use of linear no threshold for assessing the effects of low doses. J Radiol Prot 2006;26:317–24

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Mettler FA,
   2. Wiest PW,
   3. Locken JA,
   4. et al

   . CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot 2000;20:353–59

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Mazonakis M,
    2. Tzedakis A,
    3. Damilakis J,
    4. et al

    . Thyroid dose from common head and neck CT examinations in children: is there an excess risk for thyroid cancer induction? Eur Radiol 2007;17:1352–57. Epub 2006 Sep 21

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Namasivayam S,
    2. Kalra MK,
    3. Pottala KM,
    4. et al

    . Optimization of Z-axis automatic exposure control for multidetector row CT evaluation of neck and comparison with fixed tube current technique for image quality and radiation dose. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:2221–25

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Maher MM,
    3. Toth TL,
    4. et al

    . Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233:649–57

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    1. Rizzo S,
    2. Kalra M,
    3. Schmidt B,
    4. 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;186:673–79

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. McCollough CH,
    2. Bruesewitz MR,
    3. Kofler JM

    . CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 2006;26:503–12

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Mulkens TH,
    2. Marchal P,
    3. Daineffe S,
    4. et al

    . Comparison of low-dose with standard-dose multidetector CT in cervical spine trauma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1444–50

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Rizzo S,
    3. Maher MM,
    4. et al

    . Chest CT performed with z-axis modulation: scanning protocol and radiation dose. Radiology 2005;237:303–08

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Prasad SR,
    2. Wittram C,
    3. Shepard JA,
    4. et al

    . Standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose chest CT: comparing the effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:461–65

    PubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Mullins ME,
    2. Lev MH,
    3. Bove P,
    4. et al

    . Comparison of image quality between conventional and low-dose nonenhanced head CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:533–38

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Prasad S,
    3. Saini S,
    4. et al

    . Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1101–06

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Maher MM,
    3. D'Souza RV,
    4. et al

    . Detection of urinary tract stones at low-radiation-dose CT with z-axis automatic tube current modulation: phantom and clinical studies. Radiology 2005;235:523–29

    PubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Maher MM,
    3. Toth TL,
    4. et al

    . Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619–28

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    1. McNitt-Gray MF

    . AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: topics in CT—radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002;22:1541–53

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Brem MH,
    2. Zamani AA,
    3. Riva R,
    4. et al

    . Multidetector CT of the paranasal sinus: potential for radiation dose reduction. Radiology 2007;243:847–52

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Cohnen M,
    2. Fischer H,
    3. Hamacher J,
    4. et al

    . CT of the head by use of reduced current and kilovoltage: relationship between image quality and dose reduction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:1654–60

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Marmolya G,
    2. Wiesen EJ,
    3. Yagan R,
    4. et al

    . Paranasal sinuses: low-dose CT. Radiology 1991;181:689–91

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Husstedt HW,
    2. Prokop M,
    3. Dietrich B,
    4. et al

    . Low-dose high-resolution CT of the petrous bone. J Neuroradiol 2000;27:87–92

    PubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Sohaib SA,
    2. Peppercorn PD,
    3. Horrocks JA,
    4. et al

    . The effect of decreasing mAs on image quality and patient dose in sinus CT. Br J Radiol 2001;74:157–61

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Takahashi M,
    2. Maguire WM,
    3. Ashtari M,
    4. et al

    . Low-dose spiral computed tomography of the thorax: comparison with the standard-dose technique. Invest Radiol 1998;33:68–73

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    1. Kalra MK,
    2. Maher MM,
    3. Toth TL,
    4. et al

    . Comparison of Z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique with fixed tube current CT scanning of abdomen and pelvis. Radiology 2004;232:347–53

    PubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Graser A,
    2. Wintersperger BJ,
    3. Suess C,
    4. et al

    . Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:695–701

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Smith A,
    2. Dillon W,
    3. Lau B,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose reduction strategy for CT protocols: successful implementation in neuroradiology section. Radiology 2008;24:499–506
32. 32.↵
    1. Smith AB,
    2. Dillon WP,
    3. Gould R,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose-reduction strategies for neuroradiology CT protocols. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1628–32

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    1. Morin RL,
    2. Gerber TC,
    3. McCollough CH

    . Radiation dose in computed tomography of the heart. Circulation 2003;107:917–22

    FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    1. Hurwitz LM,
    2. Yoshizumi TT,
    3. Goodman PC,
    4. et al

    . Radiation dose savings for adult pulmonary embolus 64-MDCT using bismuth breast shields, lower peak kilovoltage, and automatic tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:244–53

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
35. 35.↵
    1. Heyer CM,
    2. Lemburg SP,
    3. Kagel T,
    4. et al

    . Evaluation of chronic infectious interstitial pulmonary disease in children by low-dose CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1289–95

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Suess C,
    2. Chen X

    . Dose optimization in pediatric CT: current technology and future innovations. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:729–34

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    1. Heyer CM,
    2. Mohr PS,
    3. Lemburg SP,
    4. et al

    . Image quality and radiation exposure at pulmonary CT angiography with 100- or 120-kVp protocol: prospective randomized study. Radiology 2007;245:577–83

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science