Becker C, Schätzl M, Feist H, Bäuml A, Schöpf U J, Michalski G, Lechel U, Hengge M, Brüning R, Reiser M
Institut für Radiologische Diagnostik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Klinikum Grosshadern.
Rofo. 1999 Jan;170(1):99-104. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1011015.
To compare the effective dose applied by sequential CT (SEQ), spiral CT (SCT), electron beam CT (EBT) and coronary angiography for investigations of the chest, abdomen and the heart.
The Alderson Phantom was used to compare the effective dose for all modalities. In addition, the effective dose for conventional CT (SEQ and SCT) was estimated with a mathematical phantom.
For CT investigation of the chest and abdomen the dose was highest for the EBT (11 mSv and 25 mSv, respectively) and slightly lower for the SEQ (7.8 mSv and 21.5 mSv, respectively), whereas spiral CT required the least dose (5.3 mSv and 8.8 mSv, respectively). For coronary calcium screening (0.8 mSv) and EBT coronary angiography (1.7 mSv) the dose was lower than for coronary catheter angiography (3.3 mSv). For conventional CT the difference between the effective dose derived by the mathematical phantom and by the Alderson phantom was 2% to 20%.
For investigations of the chest and abdomen the effective dose applied by SCT is significantly lower than that with EBT and SEQ. For investigation of the coronary arteries the effective dose applied by EBT is lower than that for coronary catheter angiography.
比较序列CT（SEQ）、螺旋CT（SCT）、电子束CT（EBT）及冠状动脉造影用于胸部、腹部和心脏检查时所施加的有效剂量。
使用阿尔德森体模比较所有检查方式的有效剂量。此外，用数学体模估算传统CT（SEQ和SCT）的有效剂量。
对于胸部和腹部的CT检查，EBT的剂量最高（分别为11 mSv和25 mSv），SEQ的剂量略低（分别为7.8 mSv和21.5 mSv），而螺旋CT所需剂量最少（分别为5.3 mSv和8.8 mSv）。对于冠状动脉钙化筛查（0.8 mSv）和EBT冠状动脉造影（1.7 mSv），其剂量低于冠状动脉导管造影（3.3 mSv）。对于传统CT，数学体模得出的有效剂量与阿尔德森体模得出的有效剂量之间的差异为2%至20%。
对于胸部和腹部检查，SCT所施加的有效剂量显著低于EBT和SEQ。对于冠状动脉检查，EBT所施加的有效剂量低于冠状动脉导管造影。
