Choonsik Lee1, Mark S Pearce2, Jane A Salotti2, Richard W Harbron2, Mark P Little1, Kieran McHugh3, Claire-Louise Chapple4, Amy Berrington de Gonzalez1. 1. 1 Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD, USA. 2. 2 Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 3. 3 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, London, UK. 4. 4 The Newcastle upon Tyne, Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although CT scans provide great medical benefits, concerns have been raised about the magnitude of possible associated cancer risk, particularly in children who are more sensitive to radiation than adults. Unnecessary high doses during CT examinations can also be delivered to children, if the scan parameters are not adjusted for patient age and size. We conducted the first survey to directly assess the trends in CT scan parameters and doses for paediatric CT scans performed in Great Britain between 1978 and 2008. METHODS: We retrieved 1073 CT film sets from 36 hospitals. The patients were 0-19 years old, and CT scans were conducted between 1978 and 2008. We extracted scan parameters from each film including tube current-time product [milliampere seconds (mAs)], tube potential [peak kilovoltage (kVp)] and manufacturer and model of the CT scanner. We estimated the mean mAs for head and trunk (chest and abdomen/pelvis) scans, according to patient age (0-4, 5-9, 10-14 and 15-19 years) and scan year (<1990, 1990-1994, 1995-1999 and ≥2000), and then derived the volumetric CT dose index and estimated organ doses. RESULTS: For head CT scans, mean mAs decreased by about 47% on average from before 1990 to after 2000, with the decrease starting around 1990. The mean mAs for head CTs did not vary with age before 1990, whereas slightly lower mAs values were used for younger patients after 1990. Similar declines in mAs were observed for trunk CTs: a 46% decline on an average from before 1990 to after 2000. Although mean mAs for trunk CTs did not vary with age before 1990, the value varied markedly by age, from 63 mAs for age 0-4 years compared with 315 mAs for those aged >15 years after 2000. No material changes in kVp were found. Estimated brain-absorbed dose from head CT scans decreased from 62 mGy before 1990 to approximately 30 mGy after 2000. For chest CT scans, the lung dose to children aged 0-4 years decreased from 28 mGy before 1990 to 4 mGy after 2000. CONCLUSION: We found that mAs for head and trunk CTs was approximately halved starting around 1990, and age-specific mAs was generally used for paediatric scans after this date. These changes will have substantially reduced the radiation exposure to children from CT scans in Great Britain. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The study shows that mAs and major organ doses for paediatric CT scans in Great Britain began to decrease around 1990.
OBJECTIVE: Although CT scans provide great medical benefits, concerns have been raised about the magnitude of possible associated cancer risk, particularly in children who are more sensitive to radiation than adults. Unnecessary high doses during CT examinations can also be delivered to children, if the scan parameters are not adjusted for patient age and size. We conducted the first survey to directly assess the trends in CT scan parameters and doses for paediatric CT scans performed in Great Britain between 1978 and 2008. METHODS: We retrieved 1073 CT film sets from 36 hospitals. The patients were 0-19 years old, and CT scans were conducted between 1978 and 2008. We extracted scan parameters from each film including tube current-time product [milliampere seconds (mAs)], tube potential [peak kilovoltage (kVp)] and manufacturer and model of the CT scanner. We estimated the mean mAs for head and trunk (chest and abdomen/pelvis) scans, according to patient age (0-4, 5-9, 10-14 and 15-19 years) and scan year (<1990, 1990-1994, 1995-1999 and ≥2000), and then derived the volumetric CT dose index and estimated organ doses. RESULTS: For head CT scans, mean mAs decreased by about 47% on average from before 1990 to after 2000, with the decrease starting around 1990. The mean mAs for head CTs did not vary with age before 1990, whereas slightly lower mAs values were used for younger patients after 1990. Similar declines in mAs were observed for trunk CTs: a 46% decline on an average from before 1990 to after 2000. Although mean mAs for trunk CTs did not vary with age before 1990, the value varied markedly by age, from 63 mAs for age 0-4 years compared with 315 mAs for those aged >15 years after 2000. No material changes in kVp were found. Estimated brain-absorbed dose from head CT scans decreased from 62 mGy before 1990 to approximately 30 mGy after 2000. For chest CT scans, the lung dose to children aged 0-4 years decreased from 28 mGy before 1990 to 4 mGy after 2000. CONCLUSION: We found that mAs for head and trunk CTs was approximately halved starting around 1990, and age-specific mAs was generally used for paediatric scans after this date. These changes will have substantially reduced the radiation exposure to children from CT scans in Great Britain. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The study shows that mAs and major organ doses for paediatric CT scans in Great Britain began to decrease around 1990.
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; Greg Morrison; Keith J Strauss; Nora Tuggle Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Fred A Mettler; Mythreyi Bhargavan; Keith Faulkner; Debbie B Gilley; Joel E Gray; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Jill A Lipoti; Mahadevappa Mahesh; John L McCrohan; Michael G Stabin; Bruce R Thomadsen; Terry T Yoshizumi Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-09-29 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Choonsik Lee; Kwang Pyo Kim; Daniel Long; Ryan Fisher; Chris Tien; Steven L Simon; Andre Bouville; Wesley E Bolch Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: L Krille; S Dreger; R Schindel; T Albrecht; M Asmussen; J Barkhausen; J D Berthold; A Chavan; C Claussen; M Forsting; E A L Gianicolo; K Jablonka; A Jahnen; M Langer; M Laniado; J Lotz; H J Mentzel; A Queißer-Wahrendorf; O Rompel; I Schlick; K Schneider; M Schumacher; M Seidenbusch; C Spix; B Spors; G Staatz; T Vogl; J Wagner; G Weisser; H Zeeb; M Blettner Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Choonsik Lee; Daniel Lodwick; Jorge Hurtado; Deanna Pafundi; Jonathan L Williams; Wesley E Bolch Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Mark S Pearce; Jane A Salotti; Mark P Little; Kieran McHugh; Choonsik Lee; Kwang Pyo Kim; Nicola L Howe; Cecile M Ronckers; Preetha Rajaraman; Alan W Sir Craft; Louise Parker; Amy Berrington de González Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Choonsik Lee; Neige Journy; Brian E Moroz; Mark Little; Richard Harbron; Kieran McHugh; Mark Pearce; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: Frederic H Fahey; Alison Goodkind; Robert D MacDougall; Leah Oberg; Sonja I Ziniel; Richard Cappock; Michael J Callahan; Neha Kwatra; S Ted Treves; Stephan D Voss Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kristy R Kutanzi; Annie Lumen; Igor Koturbash; Isabelle R Miousse Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-10-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Neige M Y Journy; Choonsik Lee; Richard W Harbron; Kieran McHugh; Mark S Pearce; Amy Berrington de González Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Rebecca Ward; William D Carroll; Paula Cunningham; Sheng-Ang Ho; Mary Jones; Warren Lenney; David Thompson; Francis J Gilchrist Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Johanna M Meulepas; Cécile M Ronckers; Anne M J B Smets; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Patrycja Gradowska; Choonsik Lee; Andreas Jahnen; Marcel van Straten; Marie-Claire Y de Wit; Bernard Zonnenberg; Willemijn M Klein; Johannes H Merks; Otto Visser; Flora E van Leeuwen; Michael Hauptmann Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Susan C Shelmerdine; Dean Langan; John C Hutchinson; Melissa Hickson; Kerry Pawley; Joseph Suich; Liina Palm; Neil J Sebire; Angela Wade; Owen J Arthurs Journal: Lancet Child Adolesc Health Date: 2018-09-22