Radiation Doses from Diagnostic X-Ray Studies

Handloser, J.S.; Love, Robert A.

doi:10.1148/57.2.252

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The over lying soft tissues partially shield the ovaries; the effect is not as great for the newborn phantom due to the reduction in thickness of over lying tissue. The simulated unshielded adult testicular doses of 1.8 and 1.6 mGy with standard and additional beam filtration, respectively, were more than double the value, 0.74 mGy, 8 reported by Jeukens, et al in 2018 and were not less than 5% of Handloser, et al’s estimated dose of 11.5 and 9.5 mGy in the 1950s 5 as suggested in the Introduction . Additionally, Jeukens et al reported doses to the ovaries of 0.24 mGy 8 which is 44% of the ovarian dose in this study (i.e., 0.54 mGy for standard filtration).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…The use of Lead (Pb) or Pb equivalent materials between the source of X‐rays and the patient to reduce radiation dose to the male or female gonads during diagnostic X‐ray examinations of the abdomen/pelvis became common in the 1950s 1–4 . In the first half of the 1950s the entrance surface air kerma with backscatter (K a,e ) for an anterior‐posterior (AP) radiograph of the adult abdomen or pelvis was 11.5 or 9.5 mGy, respectively, 5 and 1.4 mGy for an infant 6 . Gonadal shielding was believed to reduce dose to the male gonads by 98% in the early 1950s when limited additional beam filtration was used and 94% to 96% in the latter half of the 1950s when ‘standard’ beam filtration was adopted 2,7 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Achievable dose reductions with gonadal shielding for children and adults during abdominal/pelvic radiographic examinations: A Monte Carlo simulation

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Recently, medical professionals have reconsidered the practice of routine gonadal shielding for radiographic examinations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the gonadal dose reduction achievable with gonadal shields in the primary beam during abdominal/pelvic radiographic examinations under ideal and non‐ideal shielding placement. Methods CT scans of CIRS anthropomorphic phantoms were used to perform voxelized Monte Carlo simulations of the photon transport during abdominal/pelvic radiographic examinations with standard filtration and 0.1 mm Cu + 1 mm Al added filtration to estimate gonadal doses for an adult, 5 yr old, and newborn phantom with and without gonadal shields. The reduction in dose when the shields were not placed at the ideal locations was also evaluated. The ratio of the number of scattered‐to‐primary photons (SPR) across the anteroposterior (AP) dimension of the phantoms was also reported. Results The simulated dose reduction with ideal shielding placement for the testes and ovaries ranged from 80% to 90% and 55% to 70% respectively. For children, a misalignment of the shield to the gonad of 4 cm reduced the measured dose reduction to the gonads to <10%. For adults, this effect did not occur until the misalignment increased to ~6 cm. Effects of dose reduction with and without the gonadal shields properly placed were similar for standard filtration and added filtration. SPR at the level of the testes was consistently <1 for all phantoms. SPR for ovaries was ~1.5 for the adult and 5‐yr old, and ~1 for the newborn phantom. Conclusion Dose reduction with ideal alignment of the simulated gonadal shield to the gonads in this study was greater for the testes than the ovaries; both reductions were substantial. However, the dose reductions were greatly reduced (to <10%) for both sexes with misalignment of the gonads to the shields by 4 cm for children and 6 cm for adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Achievable dose reductions with gonadal shielding for children and adults during abdominal/pelvic radiographic examinations: A Monte Carlo simulation

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Physical data on the effects of filtration of X-ray beams in the diagnostic range have been published and the advisability of using filtration has been stressed (Martin, 1948;Trout, Kelly and Cathey, 1952;Reid, 1947-50;Ritter, Warren and Pendergrass, 1952;and Handloser and Love, 1951).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Radiographic Techniques with Special Reference to Dosage

Ardran¹,

Crooks²

1953

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…T HE radiation dose received by the skin of the patient per exposure in chest radiography has been given as 0-04-0-4 r, average 0-2 r, by Martin (1947) and as 0-05 r by Handloser and Love (1951). Using 3 mm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%