Iranian Journal of Radiology

Published by: Kowsar

Assessment of Radiation Dose and Image Quality of Multidetector Computed Tomography

Haytham Al Ewaidat 1 , * , Xiaoming Zheng 2 , Yousef Khader 3 , Mostafa Abdelrahman 1 , Mostafa Khaled Mustafa Alhasan 1 , Mohammad Ahmmad Rawashdeh 1 , Dana Samir Al Mousa 1 and Khaled Zayed Ali Alawneh 4
Authors Information
1 Department of Allied Medical Sciences-Radiologic Technology, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
2 Medical Radiation Science, School of Dentistry and Health Science, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia
3 Medical Education and Biostatistics, Faculty Medicine Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
4 Department of Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
Article information
  • Iranian Journal of Radiology: July 2018, 15 (3); e59554
  • Published Online: June 17, 2018
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: August 29, 2017
  • Revised: April 19, 2018
  • Accepted: April 25, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/iranjradiol.59554

To Cite: Al Ewaidat H, Zheng X, Khader Y, Abdelrahman M, Mustafa Alhasan M K, et al. Assessment of Radiation Dose and Image Quality of Multidetector Computed Tomography, Iran J Radiol. 2018 ; 15(3):e59554. doi: 10.5812/iranjradiol.59554.

Copyright © 2018, Iranian Journal of Radiology. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Patients and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Efstathopoulos EP, Kelekis NL, Pantos I, Brountzos E, Argentos S, Grebac J, et al. Reduction of the estimated radiation dose and associated patient risk with prospective ECG-gated 256-slice CT coronary angiography. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54(17):5209-22. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/17/009. [PubMed: 19671974].
  • 2. Mori S, Endo M, Nishizawa K, Murase K, Fujiwara H, Tanada S. Comparison of patient doses in 256-slice CT and 16-slice CT scanners. British J Radiol. 2006;79(937):56-61.
  • 3. Arthurs O, Yates S, Set P, Gibbons D, Dixon A. Evaluation of image quality and radiation dose in adolescent thoracic imaging: 64-slice is preferable to 16-slice multislice CT. Br J Radiol. 2014;87(1036):20130621. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20130621. [PubMed: 24288400]. [PubMed Central: PMC4067011].
  • 4. Valentin J. Managing patient dose in multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). Elsevier; 2007.
  • 5. Jurik AG, Jessen KA, Hansen J. Image quality and dose in computed tomography. Eur Radiol. 1997;7(1):77-81. doi: 10.1007/s003300050114. [PubMed: 9000403].
  • 6. Iannaccone R, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, Murakami T, Lamazza A, Fiori E, et al. Colorectal polyps: detection with low-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography versus two sequential colonoscopies. Radiology. 2005;237(3):927-37. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2373041747. [PubMed: 16304113].
  • 7. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Hamberg LM, Blake MA, Shepard JA, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology. 2004;230(3):619-28. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2303021726. [PubMed: 14739312].
  • 8. Kalra MK, Rizzo S, Maher MM, Halpern EF, Toth TL, Shepard JA, et al. Chest CT performed with z-axis modulation: scanning protocol and radiation dose. Radiology. 2005;237(1):303-8. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2371041227. [PubMed: 16183938].
  • 9. Menzel H, Schibilla H, Teunen D. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Luxembourg Europ Commission. 2000:16262.
  • 10. Vite C, Mangini M, Strocchi S, Novario R, Tanzi F, Carrafiello G. Dosimetric and image quality assessment of different acquisition protocols of a novel 64-slice CT scanner. Medical Imaging. Int Societ Optic Photonic. 2006;6142.
  • 11. Nagel HD. CT parameters that influence the radiation dose. Radiation dose from adult and pediatric multidetector computed tomography. Springer; 2007. p. 51-79.
  • 12. Bongartz G, Golding S, Jurik A, Leonardi M, Van Meerten E, Geleijns J. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. EUR(Luxembourg). 1999.
  • 13. Gray JE, Archer BR, Butler PF, Hobbs BB, Mettler FJ, Pizzutiello RJ, et al. Reference values for diagnostic radiology: application and impact. Radiology. 2005;235(2):354-8. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2352020016. [PubMed: 15758190].
  • 14. Seeram E, Brennan PC. Diagnostic reference levels in radiology. Radiol Technol. 2006;77(5):373-84. quiz 385-7. [PubMed: 16709686].
  • 15. Shrimpton P, Hillier M, Lewis M, Dunn M. National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol. 2014.
  • 16. Brix G, Nagel HD, Stamm G, Veit R, Lechel U, Griebel J, et al. Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(8):1979-91. doi: 10.1007/s00330-003-1883-y. [PubMed: 12687286].
  • 17. Kalender WA. Computed tomography: fundamentals, system technology, image quality, applications. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
  • 18. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L, Christner J. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin North Am. 2009;47(1):27-40. doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2008.10.006. [PubMed: 19195532]. [PubMed Central: PMC2743386].
  • 19. Yu L, Liu X, Leng S, Kofler JM, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, Qu M, et al. Radiation dose reduction in computed tomography: techniques and future perspective. Imaging Med. 2009;1(1):65-84. doi: 10.2217/iim.09.5. [PubMed: 22308169]. [PubMed Central: PMC3271708].
  • 20. McCollough C, Cody D, Edyvean S, Geise R, Gould B, Keat N. The measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. Report AAPM Task Group. 2008;23:1-28.
  • 21. Huda W, Ogden KM, Khorasani MR. Converting dose-length product to effective dose at CT. Radiology. 2008;248(3):995-1003. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2483071964. [PubMed: 18710988]. [PubMed Central: PMC2657852].
  • 22. Tapiovaara MJ. Review of relationships between physical measurements and user evaluation of image quality. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;129(1-3):244-8. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncn009. [PubMed: 18252851].
  • 23. Zarb F, Rainford L, McEntee MF. Image quality assessment tools for optimization of CT images. Radiograph. 2010;16(2):147-53.
  • 24. Tingberg A, Bath M, Hakansson M, Medin J, Besjakov J, Sandborg M. Evaluation of image quality of lumbar spine images: a comparison between FFE and VGA Oxford Journals. Radiat Protect Dosimetr. 2005;114(1-3):53-61.
  • 25. McCollough C, Cody D, Edyvean S, Geise R, Gould B, Keat N. The Measurement, Reporting, and Management of Radiation Dose in CT. 2008. Available from:
  • 26. Rehani M, Kalra M, McCollough C, Nagel HD, Collins L, Kalender W. Managing Patient Dose in Multi-detector Computed Tomography (MDCT). 2006.
  • 27. Tingberg A, Bath M, Hakansson M, Medin J, Besjakov J, Sandborg M, et al. Evaluation of image quality of lumbar spine images: a comparison between FFE and VGA. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):53-61. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nch566. [PubMed: 15933081].
  • 28. Foley SJ, McEntee MF, Rainford LA. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1018):1390-7. doi: 10.1259/bjr/15839549. [PubMed: 22595497]. [PubMed Central: PMC3474022].
  • 29. Furlow B. Radiation Dose in Computed Tomography radiologic. Technol. 2010;81:437-50.
  • 30. Jaffe TA, Yoshizumi TT, Toncheva G, Anderson-Evans C, Lowry C, Miller CM, et al. Radiation dose for body CT protocols: variability of scanners at one institution. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(4):1141-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2330. [PubMed: 19770340].
  • 31. Thornton FJ, Paulson EK, Yoshizumi TT, Frush DP, Nelson RC. Single versus multi–detector row CT: comparison of radiation doses and dose profiles. Academic Radiol. 2003;10(4):379-85.
  • 32. Nishizawa K, Mori S, Ohno M, Yanagawa N, Yoshida T, Akahane K, et al. Patient dose estimation for multi-detector-row CT examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;128(1):98-105. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncm244. [PubMed: 17595212].
  • 33. Alzimami K. Assessment of Radiation doses to Paediatric Patients in Computed Tomography Procedures. Pol J Radiol. 2014;79:344-8. doi: 10.12659/PJR.890806. [PubMed: 25289112]. [PubMed Central: PMC4186214].
  • 34. Pera CM, Girjoaba OI, Cucu A, Iosif M. Comparison of radiation dose in abdomen-pelvis and trunk imaging between 64 slice and 16 slice CT. Physica Medica. 2016;3(Supplement 3):295.
  • 35. Karim M, Hashim S, Sabarudin A, Bradley D, Bahruddin N. Evaluating Organ Dose and Radiation Risk of Routine CT Examinations in Johor, Malaysia. Sains Malaysiana. 2016;45(4):567-73.
  • 36. Tsapaki V, Aldrich JE, Sharma R, Staniszewska MA, Krisanachinda A, Rehani M, et al. Dose reduction in CT while maintaining diagnostic confidence: diagnostic reference levels at routine head, chest, and abdominal CT--IAEA-coordinated research project. Radiology. 2006;240(3):828-34. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2403050993. [PubMed: 16837668].
  • 37. Heyer CM, Mohr PS, Lemburg SP, Peters SA, Nicolas V. Image quality and radiation exposure at pulmonary CT angiography with 100- or 120-kVp protocol: prospective randomized study. Radiology. 2007;245(2):577-83. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2452061919. [PubMed: 17940308].
  • 38. Waaijer A, Prokop M, Velthuis BK, Bakker CJ, de Kort GA, van Leeuwen MS. Circle of Willis at CT angiography: dose reduction and image quality--reducing tube voltage and increasing tube current settings. Radiology. 2007;242(3):832-9. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2423051191. [PubMed: 17229873].
  • 39. Nakayama Y, Awai K, Funama Y, Hatemura M, Imuta M, Nakaura T, et al. Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology. 2005;237(3):945-51. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2373041655. [PubMed: 16237140].
  • 40. Ogbole GI. Radiation dose in paediatric computed tomography: risks and benefits. Ann Ib Postgrad Med. 2010;8(2):118-26. [PubMed: 25161479]. [PubMed Central: PMC4111023].
  • 41. Fujii K, Aoyama T, Yamauchi-Kawaura C, Koyama S, Yamauchi M, Ko S . Radiation dose evaluation in 64-slice CT examinations with adult and paediatric anthropomorphic phantoms. Br J Radiol. 2014.
  • 42. Allen BC, Baker ME, Einstein DM, Remer EM, Herts BR, Achkar JP. Effect of Altering Automatic Exposure Control Settings and Quality Reference mAs on Radiation Dose, Image Quality, and Diagnostic Efficacy in MDCT Enterography of Active Inflammatory Crohn's Disease. America J Roentgenol. 2010;195(1):89-100.
  • 43. Elojeimy S, Tipnis S, Huda W. Relationship between radiographic techniques (kilovolt and milliampere-second) and CTDI(VOL). Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010;141(1):43-9. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncq138. [PubMed: 20406742].
  • 44. Golding SJ. Multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT): the dose challenge of the new revolution. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):303-7. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nch545. [PubMed: 15933126].
  • 45. Tsapaki V, Rehani M. Dose management in CT facility. Biomed Imaging Interv J. 2007;3(2). e43. doi: 10.2349/biij.3.2.e43. [PubMed: 21614279]. [PubMed Central: PMC3097661].

Featured Image:

Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments