Literature DB >> 20081559

Spine computed tomography doses and cancer induction.

Paula J Richards1, Jennifer George, Marie Metelko, Mark Brown.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Computer modeling using patient computed tomography (CT) exposure data.
OBJECTIVE: To adequately consent patients, radiation dose needs to be converted into a relative risk of inducing a cancer. This article estimates different radiation doses and their relative risk of inducing a cancer from spine CT. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There has been a marked increase in imaging, particularly CT, and medical exposures make up the majority of background radiation. There is little in the literature about radiation does form spine radiograph and CT imaging.
METHOD: Based on Monte Carlo simulations and the use of software designed for CT dosimetry, the anatomic region of the spine was mapped onto a mathematical phantom. The routine CT protocol was applied with corrections made to reflect the variation in radiation exposure along the length of the spine, resulting from automatic exposure control. The effective dose was calculated for each protocol and the relative risk of cancer induction calculated.
RESULTS: Risk ratio for inducing a cancer when CT scanning the whole lumbar spine was about 1 in 3200, which was much less than the risk of CTing the whole dorsal spine (about 1 in 1800) due to the longer coverage required and the anatomic implications of scanning in the region of the cervical dorsal junction. Quantitative CT of the lumbar spine is a low dose technique with estimated effective dose about 0.1 mSv with an estimated cancer risk of 1 in 200,000 compared to a typical chest radiograph estimated effective dose of 0.02 mSv, which gives a relative risk of causing cancer of about 1 in 1,000,000. Undertaking evaluation of the dorsal and lumbar markedly reduces the amount of radiation and therefore reduces the risk, for instance the estimated effective dose of CT from L3 to L5 is about 3.5 mSv, with an estimated cancer risk of 1 in 5200.
CONCLUSION: Precise CT technique of the spine, covering the smallest area necessary to answer the clinical question, has a dramatic effect on the estimated cancer risk for individual patient. Cancer risks are summative, so spine CT imaging needs to be considered in the light of the total radiation risk to the patient over their lifetime.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20081559     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cdde47

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  25 in total

1.  EOS microdose protocol for the radiological follow-up of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Emmanuelle Ferrero; Marianne Alison; Keyvan Mazda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Conservative management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures: an update.

Authors:  A Slavici; M Rauschmann; C Fleege
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2016-12-26       Impact factor: 3.693

3.  Effect of brightness in the evaluation of lumbar pedicular screws position: clinical study.

Authors:  L M Romero-Muñoz; M Alfonso; C Villas; J L Zubieta
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2013-04-05

4.  Inpatient radiation exposure in patients with spinal trauma.

Authors:  Elizabeth Martin; Mark Prasarn; Ellen Coyne; Brian Giordano; Thomas Morgan; Per-Lennart Westessen; John Wright; Glenn Rechtine
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.985

Review 5.  Radiation risks associated with serial imaging in colorectal cancer patients: should we worry?

Authors:  Jeong Suk Oh; Jonathan B Koea
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-07       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Closed manual reduction maneuver of atlantoaxial rotatory dislocation in pediatric age.

Authors:  Atilla Akbay; Burçak Bilginer; Nejat Akalan
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2014-01-04       Impact factor: 1.475

7.  Ultrashort Time-to-Echo Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3 T for the Detection of Spondylolysis in Cadaveric Spines: Comparison With CT.

Authors:  Tim Finkenstaedt; Palanan Siriwanarangsun; Suraj Achar; Michael Carl; Sina Finkenstaedt; Nirusha Abeydeera; Christine B Chung; Won C Bae
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 6.016

8.  Comparison of a calcium phosphate bone substitute with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2: a prospective study of fusion rates, clinical outcomes and complications with 24-month follow-up.

Authors:  Rhiannon M Parker; Gregory M Malham
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-12-27       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in a lateral decubitus position: technique and outcomes in obese patients.

Authors:  Gregory M Malham; Timothy P Wagner; Matthew H Claydon
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-12

10.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Ti- and CaP-Nanocoated Polyetheretherketone Cages: Comparative Study of the 1-Year Radiological and Clinical Outcome.

Authors:  Karel Willems; Philippe Lauweryns; Gino Verleye; Johan VAN Goethem
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-12-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.