Comparison of doses for pulmonary embolism detection with helical CT and pulmonary angiography

被引:0
|
作者
Arnaud Resten
Franck Mausoleo
M. Valero
Dominique Musset
机构
[1] Service de Radiologie,
[2] Hôpital Antoine Béclère,undefined
[3] 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux,undefined
[4] 92140 Clamart,undefined
[5] Service de Médecine Nucléaire,undefined
[6] Hôpital Antoine Béclère,undefined
[7] 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux,undefined
[8] 92140 Clamart,undefined
[9] Office de Protection des Rayonnements ionisants,undefined
[10] BP35,undefined
[11] 78016 Le Vésinay,undefined
[12] Cedex,undefined
来源
European Radiology | 2003年 / 13卷
关键词
Pulmonary embolism; Radiation exposure; Lung; CT; Pulmonary angiography;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The objective of this study was to compare the radiation exposure delivered by helical CT and pulmonary angiography (PA) for the detection of pulmonary embolism (PE), with an anthropomorphic phantom. A preliminary survey defined a representative standard procedure for helical CT and PA (n=148) by choosing the exposure settings most frequently used. Then, radiation doses were measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters TLD 100 (Lif) introduced into the depth of an anthropomorphic phantom. Average doses were approximately five times smaller with helical CT than with PA (6.4±1.5 and 28±7.6 mGy, respectively). The most important doses were abreast the pulmonary apex for CT, and abreast the pulmonary arteries for PA. Compared with PA, helical CT dose distribution was relatively uniform (10–13 mGy). Finally, concerning abdomen and pelvis, doses were more important for PA than for CT scan (0.06–2.86 and 0.2–11.5 mGy, respectively). For the diagnostics of PE, radiation exposure is five times smaller with helical CT than with pulmonary angiography.
引用
收藏
页码:1515 / 1521
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of doses for pulmonary embolism detection with helical CT and pulmonary angiography
    Resten, A
    Mausoleo, F
    Valero, M
    Musset, D
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2003, 13 (07) : 1515 - 1521
  • [2] Pulmonary embolism - contribution of helical CT angiography
    Ghossain, M
    Achkar, A
    Wolf, A
    Buy, JN
    Vadrot, D
    Rochemaure, J
    Laaban, JP
    PRESSE MEDICALE, 1998, 27 (17): : 819 - 827
  • [3] Pitfalls in diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with helical CT angiography
    Beigelman, C
    Chartrand-Lefebvre, C
    Howarth, N
    Grenier, P
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1998, 171 (03) : 579 - 585
  • [4] Pulmonary Embolism in Pregnancy: Comparison of Pulmonary CT Angiography and Lung Scintigraphy
    Ridge, Carole A.
    McDermott, Shaunagh
    Freyne, Bridget J.
    Brennan, Donal J.
    Collins, Conor D.
    Skehan, Stephen J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2009, 193 (05) : 1223 - 1227
  • [5] Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with spiral CT: Comparison with pulmonary angiography and scintigraphy
    RemyJardin, M
    Remy, J
    Deschildre, F
    Artaud, D
    Beregi, JP
    HosseinFoucher, C
    Marchandise, X
    Duhamel, A
    RADIOLOGY, 1996, 200 (03) : 699 - 706
  • [6] ROLE OF CT IN CHRONIC PULMONARY-EMBOLISM - COMPARISON WITH PULMONARY ANGIOGRAPHY
    TARDIVON, AA
    MUSSET, D
    MAITRE, S
    BRENOT, F
    DARTEVELLE, P
    SIMONNEAU, G
    LABRUNE, M
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 1993, 17 (03) : 345 - 351
  • [7] Radiation dose in helical CT for detection of pulmonary embolism
    S. Diederich
    European Radiology, 2003, 13 : 1491 - 1493
  • [8] Spiral CT angiography in diagnosis of central pulmonary embolism: Comparison with pulmonary angiography and pulmonary scanning.
    Cauvain, O
    RemyJardin, M
    Remy, J
    Petyt, L
    Beregi, JP
    Steinling, M
    Duhamel, A
    REVUE DES MALADIES RESPIRATOIRES, 1996, 13 (02) : 141 - 153
  • [9] Radiation dose in helical CT for detection of pulmonary embolism
    Diederich, S
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2003, 13 (07) : 1491 - 1493
  • [10] Overdiagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism by Pulmonary CT Angiography
    Hutchinson, Barry Donald
    Navin, Patrick
    Marom, Edith M.
    Truong, Mylene T.
    Bruzzi, John F.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2015, 205 (02) : 271 - 277