Authors . | CT scanner . | Acquisition technique . | Tube potential (kVp) . | n . | CTDIvol . | DLP . | Effective dose . | Conversion factor . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lell et al.22 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 or 120 | 25 | N.A. | 71 ± 23 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.014 |
Achenbach et al.14 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 | 50 | N.A. | 62 ± 5 | 0.87 ± 0.08 | 0.014 |
Kröpil et al.13 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 80–120 | 42 | N.A. | 99.5 ± 51.1 | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.014 |
Soschynski et al.27 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical Sequential | 120 | 49 36 | N.A. N.A. | N.A. N.A. | 1.0 ± 0.8 4.8 ± 4.0 | 0.015 0.015 |
Rotkopf et al.25 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 73 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 56.5 ± 24.8 | N.A. | N.A. |
Rajiah et al.26 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 53 | 2.8 ± 1.2 | N.A. | N.A. | N.A. |
Hoe et al.28 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) Sequential | 120 90 | 92 36 | 36.0 ± 10.7 22.6 ± 8.0 | 515.6 ± 171.0 307.3 ± 111.2 | 7.2 ± 2.4 4.3 ± 1.6 | 0.014 0.014 |
Hagar et al.29 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) | 120 or 140 | 68 | 67.7 ± 19.2 | 936 ± 278 | 13.3 ± 4.2 | 0.014 |
The current study | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 70 | 40 | 1.72 ± 0.38 | 29.1 ± 6.8 | 0.41 ± 0.09 0.50 ± 0.11 0.82 ± 0.18 | 0.014 0.017 0.028 |
Authors . | CT scanner . | Acquisition technique . | Tube potential (kVp) . | n . | CTDIvol . | DLP . | Effective dose . | Conversion factor . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lell et al.22 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 or 120 | 25 | N.A. | 71 ± 23 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.014 |
Achenbach et al.14 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 | 50 | N.A. | 62 ± 5 | 0.87 ± 0.08 | 0.014 |
Kröpil et al.13 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 80–120 | 42 | N.A. | 99.5 ± 51.1 | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.014 |
Soschynski et al.27 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical Sequential | 120 | 49 36 | N.A. N.A. | N.A. N.A. | 1.0 ± 0.8 4.8 ± 4.0 | 0.015 0.015 |
Rotkopf et al.25 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 73 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 56.5 ± 24.8 | N.A. | N.A. |
Rajiah et al.26 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 53 | 2.8 ± 1.2 | N.A. | N.A. | N.A. |
Hoe et al.28 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) Sequential | 120 90 | 92 36 | 36.0 ± 10.7 22.6 ± 8.0 | 515.6 ± 171.0 307.3 ± 111.2 | 7.2 ± 2.4 4.3 ± 1.6 | 0.014 0.014 |
Hagar et al.29 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) | 120 or 140 | 68 | 67.7 ± 19.2 | 936 ± 278 | 13.3 ± 4.2 | 0.014 |
The current study | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 70 | 40 | 1.72 ± 0.38 | 29.1 ± 6.8 | 0.41 ± 0.09 0.50 ± 0.11 0.82 ± 0.18 | 0.014 0.017 0.028 |
CTDIvol, computed tomography dose index volume; DLP, dose-length product; UHR, ultra-high resolution.
Authors . | CT scanner . | Acquisition technique . | Tube potential (kVp) . | n . | CTDIvol . | DLP . | Effective dose . | Conversion factor . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lell et al.22 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 or 120 | 25 | N.A. | 71 ± 23 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.014 |
Achenbach et al.14 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 | 50 | N.A. | 62 ± 5 | 0.87 ± 0.08 | 0.014 |
Kröpil et al.13 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 80–120 | 42 | N.A. | 99.5 ± 51.1 | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.014 |
Soschynski et al.27 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical Sequential | 120 | 49 36 | N.A. N.A. | N.A. N.A. | 1.0 ± 0.8 4.8 ± 4.0 | 0.015 0.015 |
Rotkopf et al.25 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 73 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 56.5 ± 24.8 | N.A. | N.A. |
Rajiah et al.26 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 53 | 2.8 ± 1.2 | N.A. | N.A. | N.A. |
Hoe et al.28 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) Sequential | 120 90 | 92 36 | 36.0 ± 10.7 22.6 ± 8.0 | 515.6 ± 171.0 307.3 ± 111.2 | 7.2 ± 2.4 4.3 ± 1.6 | 0.014 0.014 |
Hagar et al.29 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) | 120 or 140 | 68 | 67.7 ± 19.2 | 936 ± 278 | 13.3 ± 4.2 | 0.014 |
The current study | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 70 | 40 | 1.72 ± 0.38 | 29.1 ± 6.8 | 0.41 ± 0.09 0.50 ± 0.11 0.82 ± 0.18 | 0.014 0.017 0.028 |
Authors . | CT scanner . | Acquisition technique . | Tube potential (kVp) . | n . | CTDIvol . | DLP . | Effective dose . | Conversion factor . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lell et al.22 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 or 120 | 25 | N.A. | 71 ± 23 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.014 |
Achenbach et al.14 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 100 | 50 | N.A. | 62 ± 5 | 0.87 ± 0.08 | 0.014 |
Kröpil et al.13 | Definition Flash | High-pitch helical | 80–120 | 42 | N.A. | 99.5 ± 51.1 | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.014 |
Soschynski et al.27 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical Sequential | 120 | 49 36 | N.A. N.A. | N.A. N.A. | 1.0 ± 0.8 4.8 ± 4.0 | 0.015 0.015 |
Rotkopf et al.25 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 73 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 56.5 ± 24.8 | N.A. | N.A. |
Rajiah et al.26 | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 120 | 53 | 2.8 ± 1.2 | N.A. | N.A. | N.A. |
Hoe et al.28 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) Sequential | 120 90 | 92 36 | 36.0 ± 10.7 22.6 ± 8.0 | 515.6 ± 171.0 307.3 ± 111.2 | 7.2 ± 2.4 4.3 ± 1.6 | 0.014 0.014 |
Hagar et al.29 | NAEOTOM Alpha | Helical (UHR) | 120 or 140 | 68 | 67.7 ± 19.2 | 936 ± 278 | 13.3 ± 4.2 | 0.014 |
The current study | NAEOTOM Alpha | High-pitch helical | 70 | 40 | 1.72 ± 0.38 | 29.1 ± 6.8 | 0.41 ± 0.09 0.50 ± 0.11 0.82 ± 0.18 | 0.014 0.017 0.028 |
CTDIvol, computed tomography dose index volume; DLP, dose-length product; UHR, ultra-high resolution.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.