The advantages of computed tomography (CT) are immense and have revolutionized the practice of medicine. Since its birth, the applications of CT have extended to different regions and areas of the body, allowing vast advances in the non invasive diagnosis of numerous diseases. Currently, most of the radiation applied for diagnostic purposes arises from the use of CT, nuclear medicine and fluoroscopy. Furthermore, in the last decade with the oncoming of multislice CT (MSCT), there occurred a sustained increase in the utilization of this modality worldwide, with the consequent rise of the radiation dose in the population. This fact has caught the attention of health authorities, the medical community in general and, specially, of radiologists, becoming a topic of high interest and importance around the globe.
Radiation Dose Effective Dose Tube Current Uterine Cavity Compute Tomography Study
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Wiest PW, Locken JA, Heintz PH, et al. CT scanning: a major source of radiation exposure. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2002;23:402–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Applegate KE, Amis Jr ES, Schauer DA, et al. Radiation exposure from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2289–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2277–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, NCRP Report No. 160, Marzo de 2009.Google Scholar
De “White Paper: Initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging”. En sitio web: http://www.fda.gov.
Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958–1998. Radiat Res. 2007;168:1–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimizu Y, Kodama K, Nishi N, et al. Radiation exposure and circulatory disease risk: Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivor data, 1950–2003. BMJ. 2010;340:b5349.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:2078–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:13761–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler Jr JM. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics. 2006;26:503–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee CH, Goo JM, Ye HJ, et al. Radiation dose modulation techniques in the multidetector CT era: from basics to practice1. Radiographics. 2008;28:1451–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mori S, Endo M, Obata T, et al. Properties of the prototype 256-row (cone beam) CT scanner. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:2100–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology. 2004;233:649–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar