Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 405

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Radiation Exposure during Cardiac CT: Effective Doses at Multi–Detector Row CT and Electron-Beam CT

Hunold, Peter, Vogt, Florian M., Schmermund, Axel, Debatin, Jörg F., Kerkhoff, Gert, Budde, Thomas, Erbel, Raimund, Ewen, Klaus, Barkhausen, Jörg·2003·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To measure the effective radiation doses delivered at electron-beam computed tomography (CT) and multi-detector row spiral CT of coronary arteries and to compare these doses with those delivered at catheter coronary angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anthropomorphic phantom equipped with 66 thermoluminescent dosimeters was imaged at cardiac CT. Four protocols for unenhanced coronary artery calcium scoring were simulated: one with electron-beam CT and three with multi-detector row CT. Four similar protocols for coronary CT angiography were simulated. All multi-detector row spiral CT protocols were performed with retrospective electrocardiographic triggering. Biplane catheter coronary angiography also was simulated. Radiation doses to organs were measured, and effective doses were calculated according to guidelines published in International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 60. RESULTS: Coronary artery calcium scoring with electron-beam CT yielded effective radiation doses of 1.0 and 1.3 mSv for male and female patients, respectively. The radiation doses at calcium scoring with multi-detector row CT were 1.5-5.2 mSv for male patients and 1.8-6.2 mSv for female patients. Electron-beam CT coronary angiography yielded effective doses of 1.5 and 2.0 mSv for male and female patients, respectively. The highest effective doses were delivered at multi-detector row CT angiography: 6.7-10.9 mSv for male patients and 8.1-13.0 mSv for female patients. Catheter coronary angiography yielded effective doses of 2.1 and 2.5 mSv for male and female patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Higher radiation doses are delivered at multi-detector row cardiac CT compared with the doses delivered at electron-beam CT and catheter coronary angiography.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2261011365

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 405

Metadata

Authors
Hunold, P., Vogt, F. M., Schmermund, A., Debatin, J. F., Kerkhoff, G., Budde, T., Erbel, R., Ewen, K., & Barkhausen, J.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2003-01
Volume
226
Issue
1
Pages
145-152
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2005057220
Cited by
405
References
1
FWCI
37.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Radiation Exposure during Cardiac CT: Effective Doses at Multi–Detector Row CT and Electron-Beam CT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2261011365
The paper
Hunold, P., Vogt, F. M., Schmermund, A., Debatin, J. F., Kerkhoff, G., Budde, T., Erbel, R., Ewen, K., & Barkhausen, J. (2003). Radiation Exposure during Cardiac CT: Effective Doses at Multi–Detector Row CT and Electron-Beam CT. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2261011365

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.