Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 2493-2501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Brambilla ◽  
Jenia Vassileva ◽  
Agnieszka Kuchcinska ◽  
Madan M. Rehani
BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e017548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Ward ◽  
William D Carroll ◽  
Paula Cunningham ◽  
Sheng-Ang Ho ◽  
Mary Jones ◽  
...  

ObjectivesCumulative radiation exposure is associated with increased risk of malignancy. This is important in cystic fibrosis (CF) as frequent imaging is required to monitor disease progression and diagnose complications. Previous estimates of cumulative radiation are outdated as the imaging was performed on older equipment likely to deliver higher radiation. Our objectives were to determine the radiation dose delivered to children during common radiological investigations using modern equipment and to identify the number of such investigations performed in a cohort of children with CF to calculate their cumulative radiation exposure.Design, setting and participantsData including age at investigation and radiation exposure measured as estimated effective dose (EED) were collected on 2827 radiological studies performed on children at one UK paediatric centre. These were combined with the details of all radiological investigations performed on 65 children with CF attending the same centre to enable calculation of each child’s cumulative radiation exposure.ResultsThe mean EED for the common radiological investigations varied according to age. The range was 0.01–0.02 mSv for chest X-rays, 0.03–0.11 mSv for abdominal X-rays, 0.57–1.69 mSv for CT chest, 2.9–3.9 mSv for abdominal and pelvic CT, 0.20–0.21 mSv for sinus CT and 0.15–0.52 mSv for fluoroscopy-guided procedures. The mean EED was three to five times higher for helical compared with axial chest CT scans. The mean annual cumulative EED for our cohort of children with CF was 0.15 mSv/year with an estimated cumulative paediatric lifetime EED (0–18 years) of 3.5 mSv.ConclusionsThis study provides up-to-date estimations of the radiation exposure when using common radiological investigations. These doses and the estimates of cumulative radiation exposure in children with CF are lower than previously reported. This reflects the reduced EED associated with modern equipment and the use of age-specific scanning protocols.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. S117
Author(s):  
J. De Groof ◽  
F. Vermeulen ◽  
M. Proesmans ◽  
M. Boon ◽  
K. De Boeck

2010 ◽  
Vol 78 (8) ◽  
pp. 789-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinead M. Kinsella ◽  
Joe P. Coyle ◽  
Eva B. Long ◽  
Sebastian R. McWilliams ◽  
Michael M. Maher ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 131 (16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason N. Johnson ◽  
Christoph P. Hornik ◽  
Jennifer S. Li ◽  
Daniel K. Benjamin ◽  
Terry Yoshizumi ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-103
Author(s):  
Md Hafizur Rahman

The field of Radiology and Nuclear medicine has advanced from era of X-rays to today's modern imaging techniques, most of which use the ionizing radiation. With the benefits of better diagnosis and treatment, it has caused manifold increase in radiation exposure to the patients and the radiology and nuclear medicine personnel. Many studies done till date have clearly documented the harmful effects of ionizing radiation from radiation exposure, especially cancer. This is more important in paediatric population as their tissues are more radiosensitive, and they have more years to live. Diagnostic and therapeutic radiological procedures including nuclear medicine are integral part of modern medical practices, exposing both patients and medical staff to ionizing radiation. Without proper protective measures, this radiation causes many negative health effects. Hence, proper knowledge and awareness regarding the radiation hazards and radiation protection is mandatory for health professionals, especially the nuclear medicine and radiology professionals. International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) has recommended two basic principles of radiation protection, justification of the practice and optimization of protection. Faridpur Med. Coll. J. Jul 2019;14(2): 100-103


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document