Skip Navigation

Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005 114(1-3):308-312; doi:10.1093/rpd/nch501
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Althén, J. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Althén, J. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org

Automatic tube-current modulation in CT—a comparison between different solutions

Jonas Nilsson Althén

Department of Radiation Physics, University Hospital, SE-581 85 Linköping, Sweden

Corresponding author: jonas.nilsson.althen{at}lio.se

In this study, tube-current modulation systems on two different CT equipments have been evaluated: Care Dose from Siemens and Auto mA from GE Medical Systems. Care Dose modulates the tube current in the xy-plane during rotation whereas Auto mA modulates the tube current in the z-direction. xy-Plane modulation was investigated by using an elliptic Polymethylmethacrylate phantom and a CTDI–ion chamber. To investigate modulation in the z-direction, an anthropomorphic dosimetry phantom (Atom) was used. Tests performed with and without tube-current modulation were compared with respect to absorbed dose and image quality. In the anthropomorphic phantom measurements, the dose savings were 15% using Care Dose and the photon starvation artefacts were negligible. Using Auto mA the absorbed dose depends on the chosen noise level. Image noise becomes more constant throughout the patient but photon starvation artefacts remain. We conclude that the two tube-current modulation techniques show different dose advantages and image quality artefacts.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
S MEESON, C M ALVEY, and S J GOLDING
Justifying multidetector CT in abdominal sepsis: time for review?
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2009; 82(975): 190 - 197.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. A. Leswick, M. M. Hunt, S. T. Webster, and D. A. Fladeland
Thyroid Shields versus z-Axis Automatic Tube Current Modulation for Dose Reduction at Neck CT
Radiology, November 1, 2008; 249(2): 572 - 580.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
K. Matsubara, K. Koshida, M. Suzuki, H. Tsujii, T. Yamamoto, and O. Matsui
Comparison between 3-D and z-axis automatic tube current modulation technique in multidetector-row CT
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, January 1, 2008; 128(1): 106 - 111.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.