Literature DB >> 19710483

Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures.

Reza Fazel1, Harlan M Krumholz, Yongfei Wang, Joseph S Ross, Jersey Chen, Henry H Ting, Nilay D Shah, Khurram Nasir, Andrew J Einstein, Brahmajee K Nallamothu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The growing use of imaging procedures in the United States has raised concerns about exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation in the general population.
METHODS: We identified 952,420 nonelderly adults (between 18 and 64 years of age) in five health care markets across the United States between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2007. Utilization data were used to estimate cumulative effective doses of radiation from imaging procedures and to calculate population-based rates of exposure, with annual effective doses defined as low (< or = 3 mSv), moderate (> 3 to 20 mSv), high (> 20 to 50 mSv), or very high (> 50 mSv).
RESULTS: During the study period, 655,613 enrollees (68.8%) underwent at least one imaging procedure associated with radiation exposure. The mean (+/-SD) cumulative effective dose from imaging procedures was 2.4+/-6.0 mSv per enrollee per year; however, a wide distribution was noted, with a median effective dose of 0.1 mSv per enrollee per year (interquartile range, 0.0 to 1.7). Overall, moderate effective doses of radiation were incurred in 193.8 enrollees per 1000 per year, whereas high and very high doses were incurred in 18.6 and 1.9 enrollees per 1000 per year, respectively. In general, cumulative effective doses of radiation from imaging procedures increased with advancing age and were higher in women than in men. Computed tomographic and nuclear imaging accounted for 75.4% of the cumulative effective dose, with 81.8% of the total administered in outpatient settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Imaging procedures are an important source of exposure to ionizing radiation in the United States and can result in high cumulative effective doses of radiation. 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19710483      PMCID: PMC3707303          DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0901249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  33 in total

1.  Accurate assessment of patient effective radiation dose and associated detriment risk from radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures.

Authors:  K Perisinakis; J Damilakis; N Theocharopoulos; E Manios; P Vardas; N Gourtsoyiannis
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2001-07-03       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 2.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  2007

4.  The application of effective dose to medical exposures.

Authors:  Colin J Martin
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2007-10-20       Impact factor: 0.972

5.  Image Gently(SM): a national education and communication campaign in radiology using the science of social marketing.

Authors:  Marilyn J Goske; Kimberly E Applegate; Jennifer Boylan; Priscilla F Butler; Michael J Callahan; Brian D Coley; Shawn Farley; Donald P Frush; Marta Hernanz-Schulman; Diego Jaramillo; Neil D Johnson; Sue C Kaste; Gregory Morrison; Keith J Strauss
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 6.  Technetium-99m-labeled myocardial perfusion agents: Are they better than thallium-201?

Authors:  P Kailasnath; A J Sinusas
Journal:  Cardiol Rev       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.644

7.  Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Diana L Miglioretti; Eric B Larson
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.301

8.  Evaluation of patient and staff doses during various CT fluoroscopy guided interventions.

Authors:  Nico Buls; Jessica Pagés; Johan de Mey; Michel Osteaux
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 1.316

9.  Radiation risks potentially associated with low-dose CT screening of adult smokers for lung cancer.

Authors:  David J Brenner
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Richard Doll; Dudley T Goodhead; Eric J Hall; Charles E Land; John B Little; Jay H Lubin; Dale L Preston; R Julian Preston; Jerome S Puskin; Elaine Ron; Rainer K Sachs; Jonathan M Samet; Richard B Setlow; Marco Zaider
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-11-10       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  361 in total

1.  Exposing exposure: automated anatomy-specific CT radiation exposure extraction for quality assurance and radiation monitoring.

Authors:  Aaron Sodickson; Graham I Warden; Cameron E Farkas; Ichiro Ikuta; Luciano M Prevedello; Katherine P Andriole; Ramin Khorasani
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Chest X-ray after tracheostomy is not necessary unless clinically indicated.

Authors:  William D Tobler; Juan R Mella; Joanna Ng; Anand Selvam; Peter A Burke; Suresh Agarwal
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Reduced stress dose with rapid acquisition CZT SPECT MPI in a non-obese clinical population: comparison to coronary angiography.

Authors:  W Lane Duvall; Joseph M Sweeny; Lori B Croft; Eric Ginsberg; Krista A Guma; Milena J Henzlova
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 5.952

4.  Effects of ionizing radiation on self-renewal and pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  Kitchener D Wilson; Ning Sun; Mei Huang; Wendy Y Zhang; Andrew S Lee; Zongjin Li; Shan X Wang; Joseph C Wu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  Effective dose delivered by conventional radiology to Aosta Valley population between 2002 and 2009.

Authors:  F Zenone; S Aimonetto; P Catuzzo; A Peruzzo Cornetto; P Marchisio; M Natrella; A M Rosanò; T Meloni; M Pasquino; S Tofani
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  Diagnostic value of coronary CT angiography with prospective ECG-gating in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhonghua Sun; Kwan-Hoong Ng
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 2.357

7.  Organ and effective dose reduction in adult chest CT using abdominal lead shielding.

Authors:  G R Iball; D S Brettle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Standardization and optimization of CT protocols to achieve low dose.

Authors:  Sigal Trattner; Gregory D N Pearson; Cynthia Chin; Dianna D Cody; Rajiv Gupta; Christopher P Hess; Mannudeep K Kalra; James M Kofler; Mayil S Krishnam; Andrew J Einstein
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 9.  Predicting Radiotherapy Responses and Treatment Outcomes Through Analysis of Circulating Tumor DNA.

Authors:  Aadel A Chaudhuri; Michael S Binkley; Evan C Osmundson; Ash A Alizadeh; Maximilian Diehn
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-05-15       Impact factor: 5.934

10.  Continuous cervical spine kinematics during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 4.166

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.