Radiation Dosage Absorption of the Abdominal Organs and the Skin: A Comparison Between Medical Imaging Practices
by: Phillip Yang
BASIS Advisor : Mr. Brandon Wicklow
External Advisor : Mr. Matthew McCormick
Location : Banner University Medical Center Phoenix
Doctors seek to diagnose and treat potential deadly diseases every year, medical imaging becomes paramount. Yet such technology and convenience does not come without risks. Computed Tomography (CT) and x-ray scanning have been the dominant methods of medical imaging, but with the increased awareness of the adverse effects caused by such practices, the medical community has started to search for alternative methods. One such alternate path is the use of radionuclides, which are radioactive elements used as tracers for scanning. How do the effects of radionuclides compare to CT and could it present a viable substitute? Using information from various sources, this project constructs a mathematical model of the gastrointestinal, urinary and integumentary systems. The model and radiation dose data results in a comparison of CT scans versus the use of radionuclides
Although radionuclides tend to be more radioactive than the x-rays used in CT, the type of radiation and how it is administered differs and changes the amount absorbed. CT x-rays are lower in energy and the dose distribution is almost immediate, resulting in higher chances of absorption. While it seems that radionuclides present less damage than CT, the specific imaging techniques used by both practices plays an immensely large role in determining dose absorption. The ease, reliability, and cost efficiency provided by CT overshadows most of the benefits of radionuclides which explains the current situation. Radionuclides may be a viable substitute but it requires more support and research to be recognized by the majority of the medical community.
No comments:
Post a Comment