-
Article type: Cover
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
Cover15-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Index
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
Toc15-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Index
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
Toc16-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
I-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
2-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
3-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
3-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
4-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
YOSHIHARU SUKENOBU
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
599-600
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
NAOKI SUGIYAMA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
600-603
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
MASAHIRO IRIMOTO, [in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
603-605
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
YOSHIYUKI OKADA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
605-608
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
KAORU OKAJIMA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
608-610
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
KENSEI SHIRATA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
611-615
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Shigemi Oshida, Sumitoshi Katsumata
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
616-623
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Yuichiro Narita
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
624-633
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Katsutaro Kaneko
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
634-645
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
SOJI MIYASHITA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
646-659
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
YOSHIE KODERA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
660-665
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
TETSUO HOSOYA
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
666-669
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
670-671
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
671-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japane ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
671-672
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
672-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japanese], [in Japane ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
672-677
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
[in Japanese]
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
677-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
678-679
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
TAKAYOSHI IZUMI
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
680-682
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
KOSUKE MATSUBARA, KICHIRO KOSHIDA, MASAYUKI SUZUKI, ATSUSHI FUKUDA, CH ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
683-690
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
The increased clinical use of multi-detector-row CT(MDCT) may result in increased radiation doses for patients. The objective of this study was to compare radiation dose profiles between MDCT with 16 data acquisition systems, MDCT with 4 data acquisition systems, and single-detector-row CT (SDCT), and to compare effective doses among them to measure specific organ doses. When comparing radiation dose profiles on the Z-axis, doses outside the scanning range increased, especially when a 20 mm X-ray beam width was used. Effective doses also were higher with MDCT (low helical pitch) than with SDCT (helical pitch 1.0 : 1), but were not higher with MDCT (high helical pitch) than with SDCT (helical pitch 1.0 : 1). When a 20 mm X-ray beam width or high helical pitch was used, scanning time was shortened, but doses outside the scanning range were increased. When the standard deviation (SD) is the same, there is not much difference between SDCT and MDCT in terms of effective doses if the helical pitch is 1.0 : 1. It can be expected that X-ray over-wrap under low helical pitch and incorrect parameter setting cause increased radiation dose to the patient. Therefore, high helical pitch should be used if it is possible to disregard the influence of image noise. It is important to be cautious in regard to patient radiation dose when MDCT is used, and it is necessary to perform high-quality examinations at as low a dose as possible. Optimization of the scan parameters is an important issue for the future.
View full abstract
-
MASAKI KUDO, KENJI USHIBANA, MIWA OSHIKAWA, SHIGERU SHIMOSHINBARA, SEI ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
691-700
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
Purpose : To establish a more effective false profile (FP) radiography standard via theoretical consideration of patients' non-inspection-side foot position. Problem : Existing FP radiography admits to two difficulties : 1) A 65-degree pelvic rotation results in differing inter-femoral head distances in individual patients, and 2) the desired angle of rotation of the pelvis is difficult to maintain throughout the examination period. Method : The following investigations were performed in this study : 1) inter-femoral head distance using computed tomography (CT) images; 2) optimum outside rotation angle of the non-inspection side for standing comfort; and 3) optimum foot position of the non-inspection side. Results : 1) CT examination revealed an average inter-femoral head distance of 28.7 mm in males and 40.3mm in females, with a maximum distance of 57.5 mm and minimum distance of 44.1mm. 2) Investigation established the optimum outside angle of rotation to be 60 degrees. 3) Investigation revealed that the optimum foot position requires that the patient's heel be retracted 3 cm along the axis created by a pelvic rotation of 65 degrees. CT was used to verify the accuracy of the FP view method. CT comparison revealed that X-rays are able to obtain a view quite similar in quality to that of CT. Conclusion : It is of utmost importance in FP radiography to establish the optimum foot position for a pelvic rotation value of 65 degrees.
View full abstract
-
YOSHISADA OGIHARA, KYOUKO TOMIYASU, TOMOHIKO HORIE, AKIRA HANAKI, ISAO ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
701-708
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
Purpose : We have made clinical use of FLAIR-B-TFE, where an image is taken at the null point (NP) of water with the addition of inversion pulse to B-TFE, and obtained highly effective results in many areas. Changes in NP and image contrast were reviewed to optimize this sequence. Materials and Methods : Oil, water, and venous blood before and after Gd-DTPA dispensation as well as diluted (by 500/4000 times) Gd-DTPA solution were designated as the standard phantoms wherein shot intervals (SI), scan modes, k-space ordering, TFE factor, dummy pulse, and presence or absence of IR pulses were changed. Results : What affects the NP of water most is the SI, and unless SI is long enough so that the longitudinal magnetization of water can recover to the full, NP will change. There is little difference in image contrast between the NP of water and that of blood, and a sluggish blood signal ascendance will necessitate intentional blood signal ascendance by contrast-enhancement. The signal intensity of blood after the angiographies will almost reach a plateau at an SI level of more than 2000 ms. Therefore, it is appropriate to apply SI 2000 ms, in view of the time necessary for contrast-enhancement.
View full abstract
-
HIROJI IIDA, JUNSEI HORII, MITSUHIRO CHABATAKE, TAKASHI MIZUSHIMA, IKU ...
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
709-717
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
Radiation dose limits in the controlled area of an X-ray room have been prescribed at 1.3 mSv/3 months by the Enforcement Regulations of the Medical Service Law. Leakage effective dose must be measured once within a period that does not exceed six months. Scattered radiation and leakage effective dose were measured in 4 X-ray rooms (chest X-ray room, general-purpose X-ray room, skull and neck X-ray room, and X-ray CT room) with the optically stimulated luminescence dosimeter (OSLD), which is a passive integrating dosimeter. The availability of the measurement method for radiation control with OSLD was evaluated. Scattered radiation in the inside wall surface of the skull and neck X-ray room was less than 1.3 mSv/3 months of the dose limits. There was more scattered radiation in the X-ray CT room than in other X-ray rooms, and the maximum dose was 428 mSv/3 months, measured on the floor. All measurements of leakage effective dose in the 4 X-ray rooms were less than the radiation dose limit, and most measurements of leakage effective dose were less than the detection limits of the dosimeter. Leakage effective dose as calculated by Law 188 (Law 188-Dose) was less than the radiation dose limits in three X-ray rooms, the exception being the X-ray CT room. The Law 188-Dose of the X-ray CT room exceeded 1.3 mSv/3 months at the walls where primary X-rays were directed. The measurement method of leakage effective dose with an ionization survey meter was not able to guarantee the workload of each X-ray apparatus. Therefore, we were not able to confirm the security of X-ray rooms by measurement with an ionization survey meter. Scattered radiation in X-ray rooms was generated intermittently and showed a low dose rate. Consequently, it was established that dose leakage from X-ray rooms must be measured with an integrating dosimeter. It was suggested that the measurement method of environmental dose with OSLD was useful to measurement for radiation control.
View full abstract
-
TOMOKAZU SHOHJI, MASAKI HIRAMATSU, HIDEKI HASOME
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
718-726
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
The ablation for atrial fibrillation minute movement done in our hospital is 250 minutes or less, within an average time of 150 minutes during a fluoroscopic time of about 7 hours, with very large average inspection times numerical values. However, the skin-absorbed dose could be understood only from the numerical value of the area dosimeter. It was considered that the total dose that reached the threshold was sufficient, although radiation injury would not be reported from the ablation currently done at our hospital. Therefore, we aimed to examine the inspection protocol in this hospital, and to request the patient be given an inspection dose that was the average skin-absorbed dose by using the acryl board. The amount of a total dose for an inspection of 150 minutes of fluoroscopic time was about 2.7 Gy. Moreover, a value of 1.5 Gy was indicated in the hot spot as a result of repetition in some exposure fields. However, it was thought that the possibility of exceeding the threshold of 2 Gy depending on the inspection situation in the future and other factors was tolerable because these measurements were done so as not to overvalue it more than the necessary.
View full abstract
-
Sadamitsu Nishihara
Article type: Article
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
727-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
728-730
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
731-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
731-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
736-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
737-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
738-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
738-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Appendix
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
App22-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS
-
Article type: Cover
2005 Volume 61 Issue 5 Pages
Cover16-
Published: May 20, 2005
Released on J-STAGE: June 30, 2017
JOURNAL
FREE ACCESS