2022
DOI: 10.15446/mo.n64.99290
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dosymmetric estimates of 99mTc (MAA) and 133Xe in newborn lungs using Cristy-Eckerman / Segars representations

Abstract: Using the Cristy-Eckerman (C-E) / Segars anatomical representations and the MIRD formalism, the Absorbed doses in lungs of newborn patients scanned with radiopharmaceuticals 133Xe (ventilation) and 99mTc (MAA) (perfusion) are estimated. These representations are phantoms used in Monte Carlo calculations to determine specific absorbed fractions, which, associated with the pharmaceutical residence time, determine the absorbed dose. Concerns about the dosimetric impact of using these ventilation / perfusion agent… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 12 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While the relative differences in the total doses in the uterine wall when using the Stabin and Segars phantoms are high, it depends on the representation of Stabin or Segars. It is also indicated that, regardless of the radiopharmaceutical used for pulmonary studies of a newborn patient, the substitution of the Cristy-Eckerman anthropomorphic representation for the Segars representation does not reflect very significant changes in the calculation of the absorbed dose in the lungs [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the relative differences in the total doses in the uterine wall when using the Stabin and Segars phantoms are high, it depends on the representation of Stabin or Segars. It is also indicated that, regardless of the radiopharmaceutical used for pulmonary studies of a newborn patient, the substitution of the Cristy-Eckerman anthropomorphic representation for the Segars representation does not reflect very significant changes in the calculation of the absorbed dose in the lungs [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%