Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Physics
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract.

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Mills SR, Jackson DC, Older RA, Heaston DK, Moore AV (1980) The incidence, etiologies, and avoidance of complications of pulmonary angiography in a large series. Radiology 136:295–299

    Google Scholar 

  2. Stein PD, Athanasoulis C, Amavi A et al. (1992) Complications and validity of pulmonary angiography in acute pulmonary embolism. Circulation 85:462–468

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alderson PO, Martin EC (1987) Pulmonary embolism: diagnosis with multiple imaging modalities. Radiology 164:297–312

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kelly MA, Carson JL, Palevsky HI, Schwartz JS (1991) Diagnosis pulmonary embolism: new facts and strategies. Ann Intern Med 114:300

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gefter WB, Hatabu H, Holland GA, Gupta KB, Henschke CI, Palevsky HI (1995) Pulmonary thromboembolism: recent developments in diagnosis with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 197:261–574

    Google Scholar 

  6. Schibany N, Fleischmann D, Thallinger C, Schibany A, Hahne J, Ba-Ssalamah A, Herold CJ (2001) Equipment availability and diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism in Austria. Eur Radiol 11:2287–2294

    Google Scholar 

  7. Remy-Jardin M, Remy J, Deschildre F et al. (1996) Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with spiral CT: comparison with pulmonary angiography and scintigraphy. Radiology 200:699–706

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mayo JR, Remy-Jardin M, Müller NL et al. (1997) Pulmonary embolism: prospective comparison of spiral CT with ventilation–perfusion scintigraphy. Radiology 205:447–452

    Google Scholar 

  9. Qanadli SD, El Hajjam M, Mesurolle B et al. (2000) Pulmonary embolism detection: prospective evaluation of dual-section helical CT versus selective pulmonary arteriography in 157 patients. Radiology 217:447–455

    Google Scholar 

  10. Remy-Jardin M, Remy J, Wattinne L, Giraud F (1992) Central pulmonary thromboembolism: diagnosis with spiral volumetric CT with the single-breath-hold technique: comparison with pulmonary angiography. Radiology 185:381–387

    Google Scholar 

  11. Van Rossum AB, Pattynama PM, Ton ER et al. (1996) Pulmonary embolism: validation of spiral CT angiography in 149 patients. Radiology 201:467–470

    Google Scholar 

  12. Becker C, Schatzl M, Feist H et al. (1999) Assessment of the effective dose for routine protocols in conventional CT, electron beam CT and coronary angiography. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 170:99–104

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barkhausen J, Stoblen F, Muller RD, Streubuhr U, Ewen K (1998) Effect of collimation and pitch on radiation exposure and image quality in spiral CT of the thorax. Aktuelle Radiol 8:220–224

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chang LL, Chen FD, Chang PS, Liu CC, Lien HL (1995) Assessment of dose and risk to the body following conventional and spiral computed tomography. Chung Hua I Hsueh Tsa Chih (Taipei) 55:283–289

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mini RL, Vock P, Mury R, Schneeberger PP (1995) Radiation exposure of patients who undergo CT of the trunk. Radiology 1995:557–562

  16. Remy-Jardin M, Baghaie F, Bonnel F, Masson P, Duhamel A, Remy J (2000)Thoracic helical CT: influence of subsecond scan time and thin collimation on evaluation of peripheral pulmonary arteries. Eur Radiol 10:1297–1303

    Google Scholar 

  17. McCollough CH, Zink FE (1999) Performance evaluation of a multi-slice CT system. Med Phys 26:2223–2230

    Google Scholar 

  18. Moro L, Bolsi A, Baldi M, Bertoli G, Fantinato D (2001) Single-slice and multi-slice computerized tomography: dosimetric comparison with diagnostic reference dose levels. Radiol Med 102:262–265

    Google Scholar 

  19. Huda W, Atherton JV, Ware DE, Cumming WA (1997) An approach for the estimation of effective radiation dose at CT in pediatric patients. Radiology 203:417–422

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Antoine Béclère, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140 Clamart, France

    Arnaud Resten & Dominique Musset

  2. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, Hôpital Antoine Béclère, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140 Clamart, France

    Franck Mausoleo

  3. Office de Protection des Rayonnements ionisants, BP35, 78016 Le Vésinay, Cedex, France

    M. Valero

Authors
  1. Arnaud Resten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Franck Mausoleo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Valero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dominique Musset
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnaud Resten.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Resten, A., Mausoleo, F., Valero, M. et al. Comparison of doses for pulmonary embolism detection with helical CT and pulmonary angiography. Eur Radiol 13, 1515–1521 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-002-1522-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-002-1522-z

Keywords.

Search

Navigation