The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.05.030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical application of ‘Justification’ and ‘Optimization’ principle of ALARA in pediatric CT imaging: “How many children can be protected from unnecessary radiation?”

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

2
65
0
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
65
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The latest technologic advances (such as scanners with a high volume of coverage) have enabled sub-mSv doses with acquisitions lasting less than 1 s. These devices can scan the entire thorax without the need for sedation and can obtain volumetric high-resolution images, even in small children who are unable to follow breathing instructions. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] The effective radiation doses are similar to those for previously reported acquisitions by scanners with high volumes of coverage. In the study performed by Bonelli-Sica and colleagues 6 using 256-slice MDCT (whether with ECG-gated or non-ECG-gated protocol) in pediatric patients with anomalous PV drainage, the overall effective radiation dose was 1.01 mSv (range, 0.13-6.43 mSv), and it was 0.78 mSv (range, 0.13-4.16) in patients younger than 1 year of age.…”
Section: B a Csupporting
confidence: 70%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The latest technologic advances (such as scanners with a high volume of coverage) have enabled sub-mSv doses with acquisitions lasting less than 1 s. These devices can scan the entire thorax without the need for sedation and can obtain volumetric high-resolution images, even in small children who are unable to follow breathing instructions. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] The effective radiation doses are similar to those for previously reported acquisitions by scanners with high volumes of coverage. In the study performed by Bonelli-Sica and colleagues 6 using 256-slice MDCT (whether with ECG-gated or non-ECG-gated protocol) in pediatric patients with anomalous PV drainage, the overall effective radiation dose was 1.01 mSv (range, 0.13-6.43 mSv), and it was 0.78 mSv (range, 0.13-4.16) in patients younger than 1 year of age.…”
Section: B a Csupporting
confidence: 70%
“…In an average of all age groups, the estimated additional lifetime risk for developing cancer after 10 mSv radiation exposure is approximately 1 in 2,000. 13 Children have a higher risk of damage from radiation exposure than do adults, because of longer life expectancy and higher radiation sensitivity. Therefore, pediatric scanning protocols with safeguards designed specifically for children are necessary.…”
Section: B a Cmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Appreciation of this link has, over the past decade, led to a decrease in the use of computerized tomography (CT) testing in children in part due to the dissemination of education and guidelines for reducing pediatric imaging radiation exposure 2,3 . Therapy related myeloid neoplasm, the development of either Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) or Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML), following exposure to therapeutic radiotherapy treatment, is well described and has a poor prognosis 4 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the authors state; this work re-enforces rather than challenges existing radiation protection guidelines. It may however stimulate reflection and allow conversations to ensure local radiology facilities are practicing according to best principles 2,3 to consistently limit radiation doses used for essential tests to the lowest possible level while also reducing variation by benchmarking to reference standards 5 . Our feeling is that minimizing radiation exposure, particularly in children, is prudent while also recognizing that the benefit for CT imaging for a strong medical indication outweighs risk 10 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%