| Literature DB >> 28490467 |
Jeffry A Siegel1, Bill Sacks2, Charles W Pennington3, James S Welsh4.
Abstract
A debate exists within the medical community on whether the linear no-threshold model of ionizing radiation exposure accurately predicts the subsequent incidence of radiogenic cancer. In this article, we evaluate evidence refuting the linear no-threshold model and corollary efforts to reduce radiation exposure from CT and nuclear medicine imaging in accord with the as-low-as-reasonably-achievable principle, particularly for children. Further, we review studies demonstrating that children are not, in fact, more radiosensitive than adults in the radiologic imaging dose range, rendering dose reduction for children unjustifiable and counterproductive. Efforts to minimize nonexistent risks are futile and a major source of persistent radiophobia. Radiophobia is detrimental to patients and parents, induces stress, and leads to suboptimal image quality and avoidance of imaging, thus increasing misdiagnoses and consequent harm while offering no compensating benefits.Entities:
Keywords: ALARA; children; dose optimization; linear no-threshold; radiological imaging; radiophobia
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28490467 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.117.195263
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nucl Med ISSN: 0161-5505 Impact factor: 10.057