Reduction of Radiation Dose for Cerebral Angiography Using Flat Panel Detector of Direct Conversion Type: A Vascular Phantom Study

References

1. ↵
   AM Norbash, D Busick, MP Marks. Techniques for reducing interventional neuroradiologic skin dose: tube position rotation and supplemental beam filtration. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1996;17:41–49

   Abstract
2. ↵
   Huda W, Peters KR. Radiation-induced temporary epilation after a neuroradiologically guided embolization procedure. Radiology 1994;193:642–44

   PubMedWeb of Science
3. ↵
   Kuwayama N, Takaku A, Endo S, et al. Radiation exposure in endovascular surgery of the head and neck. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994;15:1801–08

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. ↵
   Merriam GR Jr, Focht EF. A clinical study of radiation cataracts and the relationship to dose. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1957;77:759–85

   PubMedWeb of Science
5. ↵
   Merriam GR Jr. A clinical study of radiation cataracts. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1956;54:611–53
6. ↵
   Strotzer M, Volk M, Wild T, et al. Simulated bone erosions in a hand phantom: detection with conventional screen-film technology versus cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector. Radiology 2000;215:512–15

   PubMedWeb of Science
7. Ludwig K, Lenzen H, Kamm KF, et al. Performance of a flat-panel detector in detecting artificial bone lesions: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography. Radiology 2002;222:453–59

   PubMed
8. ↵
   Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Volk M, et al. Clinical application of a flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon technology: image quality and potential for radiation dose reduction in skeletal radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:23–27

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. Garmer M, Hennigs SP, Jager HJ, et al. Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging: diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:75–80

   PubMed
10. ↵
    Link TM, Rummeny EJ, Lenzen H, et al. Artificial bone erosions: detection with magnification radiography versus conventional high-resolution radiography. Radiology 1994;192:861–64

    PubMed
11. ↵
    Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH. Maximum-likelihood estimation of receiver operating (ROC) characteristic curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 1998;17:1033–53

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. ↵
    Adachi S, Hori N, Sato K, et al. Experimental evaluation of a-Se and CdTe flat-panel x-ray detectors for digital radiography and fluoroscopy. Proc SPIE 2000;3977:38–47
13. ↵
    Samei E, Flynn MJ. An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems. Med Phys 2003;30:608–22

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. ↵
    Voelk M, Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, et al. Flat-panel x-ray detector using amorphous silicon technology: reduced radiation dose for the detection of foreign bodies. Investig Radiol 1997;32:373–77

    CrossRefPubMed
15. ↵
    Rowlands JA, Hunter DM, Araj N. X-ray imaging using amorphous selenium: a photoinduced discharge readout method for digital mammography. Med Phys 1991;18:421–31

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. Chotas HG, Dobbins JT, Rabin CE. Principles of digital radiography with large-area, electronically readable detectors: a review of the basics. Radiology 1999;210:595–99

    PubMedWeb of Science
17. ↵
    Zhao W, Ji WG, Debrie A, et al. Imaging performance of amorphous selenium based flat-panel detectors for digital mammography: characterization of a small area prototype detector. Med Phys 2003;30:254–63

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. ↵
    Seibert JA, Nalcioglu O, Roeck WW. Characterization of the veiling glare PSF in x-ray image intensified fluoroscopy. Med Phys 1984;11:172–79

    CrossRefPubMed
19. ↵
    Aufrichtig R. Comparison of low contrast detectability between a digital amorphous silicon and a screen-film based imaging system for thoracic radiography. Med Phys 1999;26:1349–58

    CrossRefPubMed
20. Spahn M, Strotzer M, Volk M, et al. Digital radiography with a large-area, amorphous-silicon, flat-panel x-ray detector system. Investig Radiol 2000;35:260–66

    CrossRefPubMed
21. ↵
    Floyd CE, Warp RJ, Dobbins JT, et al. Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 2001;218:683–88

    PubMed
22. ↵
    Beck J, Rohde S, el Beltagy M, et al. Difference in configuration of ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms determined by biplanar digital subtraction angiography. Acta Neurochir (Wien)2003;145:861–65

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. ↵
    Balter S, Schueler BA, Miller DL, et al. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR Study. Part III: Dosimetric performance of the interventional fluoroscopy units. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2004;15:919–26

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. Miller DL, Balter S, Cole PE, et al. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study: part II: skin dose. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14:977–90

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. ↵
    Miller DL, Balter S, Cole PE, et al. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study: part I: overall measures of dose. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14:711–27

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science