Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 81, Issue 965, 2008, Pages 362-378

  Hall, E J ^a   Brenner, D J ^a  

^a NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ATOMIC BOMB SURVIVOR; BARIUM ENEMA; BLADDER CANCER; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COLON CANCER; COLON POLYP; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HEART DISEASE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY; IONIZING RADIATION; LEUKEMIA; LUNG CANCER; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL EXAMINATION; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PATIENT INFORMATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RADIATION CARCINOGENESIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION DOSE FRACTIONATION; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIODIAGNOSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SCREENING; SMOKING; STOMACH CANCER; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; WHOLE BODY CT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HUMANS; INFANT; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; NUCLEAR REACTORS; NUCLEAR WEAPONS; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; WHOLE-BODY IRRADIATION;

EID: 44349138945     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr/01948454     Document Type: Review

References (143)

1. International Marketing Ventures. 2006 CT Market Summary Report. Rockville, MD; 2006. Available from: http://www.imvinfo.com [Accessed 12 February 2008].
2. UK Department of Health. Department of Health Hospital Activity Statistics: Imaging and Radiodiagnostics Data files. Available from: http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/hospitalactivity/data_requests/ imaging_and_radiodiagnostics.htm [Accessed 12 February 2008].
3. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography - an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84.
4. Mettler FA. Magnitude of radiation uses and doses in the United States. Health Phys 2008; in press.
5. Pierce DA, Preston DL. Radiation-related cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat Res 2000;154:178-86.
6. Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, Funamoto S, Nishi N, Soda M, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958-1998. Radiat Res 2007;168:1-64.
7. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, Hall EJ, Land CE, Little JB, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003;100:13761-6.
8. NCRP. Uncertainties in fatal cancer risk estimates used in radiation protection. Report 126. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1997. Report No 126.
9. ICRP. Managing patient dose in computed tomography, ICRP Publication 87. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science; 2002.
10. Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, Butler PF, Callahan MJ, Coley BD, et al. The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:273-4.
11. UNSCEAR. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation: UNSCEAR 2000 report to the General Assembly. New York, NY: United Nations; 2000.
12. Dixon AK, Goldstone KE. Abdominal CT and the Euratom Directive. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1567-70.
13. Al-Omran M, Mamdani M, McLeod RS. Epidemiologic features of acute appendicitis in Ontario, Canada. Can J Surg 2003;46:263-8.
14. Euratom. Health protection against individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure. EU Directive 1997/43/Euratom. Brussels, Belgium; 1997.
15. HMSO. The ionising radiation (medical exposure) regulations: Statutory Instrument 2000. No 1059. London, UK; 2000. Available from http://www.opsi.gov. uk/si/si2000/20001059.htm [Accessed 12 February 2008].
16. Royal College of Radiologists. Making the best use of a Department of Radiology: Guidelines for doctors, 5th edn. London, UK: Royal College of Radiologists; 2003.
17. Amis ES Jr., Butler PF, Applegate KE, Birnbaum SB, Brateman LF, Hevezi JM, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4:272-84.
18. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002;22:1541-53.
19. Paterson A, Frush DP, Donnelly LF. Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric patients? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:297-301.
20. Martin CJ, Sutton DG, Sharp PF. Balancing patient dose and image quality. Appl Radiat Isot 1999;50:1-19.
21. Stamm G, Nagel HD. CT-EXPO - a novel program for dose evaluation in CT. Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed 2002;174:1570-6.
22. What's NEXT? Nationwide evaluation of x-ray trends: 2000 Computed Tomography. CRCPD Publication NEXT_ 2000CT-T: Conference of Radiation Control Directors and US Food and Drug Administration; 2006: Report No CRCPD NEXT_2000CT-T. Available from: http://www.crcpd.org/Pubs/NexTrifolds/ NEXT2000CT_T.pdf [Accessed 14 March 2008]
23. Mettler FA Jr, Wiest PW, Locken JA, Kelsey CA. CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot 2000;20:353-9.
24. Stern S, Kaczmarek R, Spelic D, Suleiman O. Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT) 2000-2001 survey of patient radiation exposure from computed tomographic (CT) examinations in the United States (see also www.fda.gov/cdrh/ct/ct-next.ppt). Radiology 2001;221:161.
25. ICRP. ICRP Publication 103: Recommendations of the ICRP. Annals of the ICRP 2007:37.
26. NCRP. Evaluation of the linear nonthreshold dose-response model for ionizing radiation. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 2001: Report No 136.
27. Gofrnan JW, Tamplin AR. Fluoroscopic radiation and risk of primary lung cancer following pneumothorax therapy of tuberculosis. Nature 1970;227:295-6.
28. Mangano JJ. A short latency between radiation exposure from nuclear plants and cancer in young children. Int J Health Serv 2006;36:113-35.
29. Tubiana M. Dose-effect relationship and estimation of the carcinogenic effects of low doses of ionizing radiation: The joint report of the Académie des Sciences (Paris) and of the Académie Nationale de Medecine. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;63:317-9.
30. Feinendegen LE. Evidence for beneficial low level radiation effects and radiation hormesis. Br J Radiol 2005;78:3-7.
31. Cardis E, Gilbert ES, Carpenter L, Howe G, Kato I, Armstrong BK, et al. Effects of low doses and low dose rates of external ionizing radiation: cancer mortality among nuclear industry workers in three countries. Radiat Res 1995;142:117-32.
32. Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, Gilbert E, Hakama M, Hill C, et al. Risk of cancer after low doses of ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study in 15 countries. Br Med J 2005;331:77.
33. Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, Gilbert E, Hakama M, Hill C, et al. The 15-country collaborative study of cancer risk among radiation workers in the nuclear industry: estimates of radiation-related cancer risks. Radiat Res 2007;167:396-416.
34. Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI, Tolstykh EI, Shagina NB, Shishkina EA, Anspaugh LR, et al. Development of an improved dose reconstruction system for the Techa River population affected by the operation of the Mayak Production Association. Radiat Res 2006;166:255-70.
35. Krestinina LY, Davis F, Ostroumova E, Epifanova S, Degteva M, Preston D, et al. Solid cancer incidence and low-dose-rate radiation exposures in the Techa River cohort: 1956 2002. Int J Epidemiol 2007;36:1038-46.
36. ICRP. Recomendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP Publication 26. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press; 1977.
37. ICRP. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection: Report 60. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press; 1991.
38. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD, Hall EJ, Berdon WE. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:289-96.
39. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007;298:317-23.
40. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 2004;263:345-51.
41. Hart D, Wall BF. UK population dose from medical X-ray examinations. Eur J Radiol 2004;50:285-91.
42. Shope TB. Radiation-induced skin injuries from fluoroscopy. Radiographics 1996;16:1195-9.
43. Stone MS, Robson KJ, LeBoit PE. Subacute radiation dermatitis from fluoroscopy during coronary artery stenting: evidence for cytotoxic lymphocyte mediated apoptosis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1998;38:333-6.
44. Vano E, Arranz L, Sastre JM, Moro C, Ledo A, Garate MT, et al. Dosimetric and radiation protection considerations based on some cases of patient skin injuries in interventional cardiology. Br J Radiol 1998;71:510-6.
45. Nahass GT, Cornelius L. Fluoroscopy-induced radiodermatitis after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Am J Gastroenterol 1998;93:1546-9.
46. Pearce M. Long-term sequelae of radiation exposure due to CT in childhood - a study in progress. In: 2008 UK Radiological Congress; 2008; Birmingham, UK.
47. Land CE, Gilbert E, Smith JM. Report of the NCI-CDC Working Group to Revise the 1985 NIH Radioepidemiological Tables. NIH Publication 03-5387. See also www.irep.nci.nih.gov. Bethesda: NIH; 2003.
48. Citarda F, Tomaselli G, Capocaccia R, Barcherini S, Crespi M. Efficacy in standard clinical practice of colonoscopic polypectomy in reducing colorectal cancer incidence. Gut 2001;48:812-5.
49. Subramanian S, Amonkar MM, Hunt TL. Use of colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: evidence from the 2000 national health interview survey. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:409-16.
50. Coin CG, Wollett FC, Coin JT, Rowland M, DeRamos RK, Dandrea R. Computerized radiology of the colon: a potential screening technique. Comput Radiol 1983;7:215-21.
51. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH. CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a practical approach for population screening. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45:361-75.
52. van Dam J, Cotton P, Johnson CD, McFarland BG, Pineau BC, Provenzale D, et al. AGA future trends report: CT colonography. Gastroenterology 2004;127:970-84.
53. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, Milano A, Katz SS, Resnick D, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thinsection low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology 2002;224:383-92.
54. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Taylor AJ, Leung WK, Winter TC, Hinshaw JL, et al. CT colonography versus colonoscopy for the detection of advanced neoplasia. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1403-12.
55. Johnson CD. For the ACRIN study investigators. The primary results of the National CT Colonography Trial. In: Fall 2007 Meeting of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN); 2007 September 19; Arlington, VA.
56. Taylor SA, Slater A, Burling DN, Tarn E, Greenhalgh R, Gartner L, et al. CT colonography: optimisation, diagnostic performance and patient acceptability of reduced-laxative regimens using barium-based faecal tagging. Eur Radiol 2008;18:32-42.
57. Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C, Kohlberg G, Hahn PF. Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology 2006;239:149-59.
58. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Mangiapane F, Lamazza A, Schillaci A, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 2004;127:1300-11.
59. Johnson CD, Manduca A, Fletcher JG, MacCarty RL, Carston MJ, Harmsen WS, et al. Noncathartic CT colonography with stool tagging: performance with and without electronic stool subtraction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:361-6.
60. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, Ahlquist DA, Nelson H, Ehman RL, et al. Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:1181-1.
61. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, Nio CY, Determann RM, Tipker CA, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 2002;224:25-33.
62. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Brink JA, Mangiapane F, Trenna S, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology 2003;229:775-81.
63. Wessling J, Fischbach R, Meier N, Allkemper T, Klusmeier J, Ludwig K, et al. CT colonography: protocol optimization with multi-detector row CT-study in an anthropomorphic colon phantom. Radiology 2003;228:753-9.
64. Luz O, Buchgeister M, Klabunde M, Trabold T, Kopp AF, Claussen CD, et al. Evaluation of dose exposure in 64-slice CT colonography. Eur Radiol 2007;17:2616-21.
65. Brenner D, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 2005;129:328-37.
66. Johnson KT, Johnson CD, Anderson SM, Bruesewitz MR, McCollough CH. CT colonography: determination of optimal CT technique using a novel colon phantom. Abdom Imaging 2004;29:173-6.
67. Graser A, Wintersperger BJ, Suess C, Reiser MF, Becker CR. Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:695-701.
68. Fontana RS. The Mayo Lung Project: a perspective. Cancer 2000;89:2352-5.
69. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Miettinen OS, et al. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 1999;354:99-105.
70. Vastag B. Lung screening study to test popular CT scans. JAMA 2002;288:1705-6.
71. Rusinek H, Naidich DP, McGuinness G, Lehman BS, McCauley DI, Krinsky GA, et al. Pulmonary nodule detection: low-dose versus conventional CT. Radiology 1998;209:243-9.
72. Bach PB, Jett JR, Pastorino U, Tockman MS, Swensen SJ, Begg CB. Computed tomography screening and lung cancer outcomes. JAMA 2007;297:953-61.
73. Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Miettinen OS. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1763-71.
74. National Research Council of the National Academies. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation - BEIR VII. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
75. NRC. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1990.
76. Gilbert ES, Stovall M, Gospodarowicz M, Van Leeuwen FE, Andersson M, Glimelius B, et al. Lung cancer after treatment for Hodgkin's disease: focus on radiation effects. Radiat Res 2003;159:161-73.
77. Alcobia I, Dilao R, Parreira L. Spatial associations of centromeres in the nuclei of hematopoietic cells: Evidence for cell-type-specific organizational patterns. Blood 2000;95:1608-15.
78. Samet JM, Pathak DR, Morgan MV, Key CR, Valdivia AA, Lubin JH. Lung cancer mortality and exposure to radon progeny in a cohort of New Mexico underground uranium miners. Health Phys 1991;61:745-52.
79. Kaufman EL, Jacobson JS, Hershman DL, Desai M, Neugut AI. Effect of breast cancer radiotherapy and cigarette smoking on risk of second primary lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:392-8.
80. NRC. Health effects of exposure to radon: BEIR VI. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
81. Pierce DA, Sharp GB, Mabuchi K. Joint effects of radiation and smoking on lung cancer risk among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat Res 2003;159:511-20.
82. Brenner DJ. Radiation risks potentially associated with low-dose CT screening of adult smokers for lung cancer. Radiology 2004;231:440-5.
83. Agatston AS, Janowitz WR, Hildner FJ, Zusmer NR, Viamonte M Jr, Detrano R. Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990;15:827-32.
84. Selvester RH, Ahmed J, Tolan GD. Asymptomatic coronary artery disease detection: update 1996. A screening protocol using 16-lead high-resolution ECG, ultrafast CT, exercise testing, and radionuclear imaging. J Electrocardiol 1996;29(Suppl):135-44.
85. Thompson BH, Stanford W. Update on using coronary calcium screening by computed tomography to measure risk for coronary heart disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2005;21:39-53.
86. Lepor NE. Screening CT-coronary angiography: ready for prime time? Rev Cardiovasc Med 2006;7:198-204.
87. Arad Y, Spadaro LA, Goodman K, Newstein D, Guerci AD. Prediction of coronary events with electron beam computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:1253-60.
88. Greenland P, LaBree L, Azen SP, Doherty TM, Detrano RC. Coronary artery calcium score combined with Framingham score for risk prediction in asymptomatic individuals. JAMA 2004;291:210-5.
89. Kondos GT, Hoff JA, Sevrukov A, Daviglus ML, Garside DB, Devries SS, et al. Electron-beam tomography coronary artery calcium and cardiac events: a 37-month follow-up of 5635 initially asymptomatic low- to intermediate-risk adults. Circulation 2003;107:2571-6.
90. Shaw LJ, Raggi P, Schisterman E, Berman DS, Callister TQ. Prognostic value of cardiac risk factors and coronary artery calcium screening for all-cause mortality. Radiology 2003;228:826-33.
91. Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht HS, Jamieson MJ, Kaul S, Berman D, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient - Part III: Executive summary of the Screening for Heart Attack Prevention and Education (SHAPE) Task Force report. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:2H-15H.
92. Leontiev O, Dubinsky TJ. CT-based calcium scoring to screen for coronary artery disease: why aren't we there yet? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:1061-3.
93. Waugh N, Black C, Walker S, McIntyre L, Cummins E, Hillis G. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for coronary artery disease: systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2006;10:iii-ivix-x1-41.
94. Hunold P, Vogt FM, Schmermund A, Debatin JF, Kerkhoff G, Budde T, et al. Radiation exposure during cardiac CT: effective doses at multi-detector row CT and electron-beam CT. Radiology 2003;226:145-52.
95. Horiguchi J, Kiguchi M, Fujioka C, Shen Y, Arie R, Sunasaka K, et al. Radiation dose, image quality, stenosis measurement, and CT densitometry using ECG-triggered coronary 64-MDCT angiography: a phantom study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:315-20.
96. Dies J, Fan E, Koenig BA, Raffin TA, Kann D, Atlas SW. Self-referred whole-body CT imaging: current implications for health care consumers. Radiology 2003;228:346-51.
97. Berland LL, Berland NW. Whole-body computed tomography screening. Semin Roentgenol 2003;38:65-76.
98. Casarella WJ. A patient's viewpoint on a current controversy. Radiology 2002;224:927.
99. Kolber CT, Zipp G, Glendinning D, Mitchell JJ. Patient expectations of full-body CT screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:W297-304.
100. Holtz A. Whole-body CT screening: Scanning or scamming? Oncol Times 2003;25:5-7.
101. Furtado CD, Aguirre DA, Sirlin CB, Dang D, Stamato SK, Lee P, et al. Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients. Radiology 2005;237:385-94.
102. Beinfeld MT, Wittenberg E, Gazelle GS. Cost-effectiveness of whole-body CT screening. Radiology 2005;234:415-22.
103. Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 2004;232:735-8.
104. Kruger RL, Schueler BA. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Med Phys 2001;28:1449-54.
105. COMARE. Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE). 12th report: The impact of personally initiated x-ray computed tomography scanning for the health assessment of asymptomatic individuals. Didcot, UK: The Health Protection Agency; 2007. Available from: http//www.comare.org.uk/documents/COMPARE12thReport.pdf [Accessed 12 February 2008].
106. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 2006;26:503-12.
107. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Schmidt B, Westerman BL, Morgan HT, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233:649-57.
108. Aldrich JE, Chang SD, Bilawich AM, Mayo JR. Radiation dose in abdominal computed tomography: the role of patient size and the selection of tube current. Can Assoc Radiol J 2006;57:152-8.
109. Lehmann KJ, Wild J, Georgi M. Clinical use of software-controlled X-ray tube modulation with "Smart-Scan" in spiral CT. Aktuelle Radiol 1997;7:156-8.
110. Keat N. CT scanner automatic exposure control systems. London, UK: Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency; 2005: Report 05016.
111. Robinson AE, Hill EP, Harpen MD. Radiation dose reduction in pediatric CT. Pediatr Radiol 1986;16:53-4.
112. Slovis TL, Berdon WE. Panel Discussion. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:242-4.
113. Donnelly LF. Reducing radiation dose associated with pediatric CT by decreasing unnecessary examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:655-7.
114. Ruess L, Sivit CJ, Eichelberger MR, Gotschall CS, Taylor GA. Blunt abdominal trauma in children: impact of CT on operative and nonoperative management. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:1011-4.
115. Navarro O, Babyn PS, Pearl RH. The value of routine follow-up imaging in pediatric blunt liver trauma. Pediatr Radiol 2000;30:546-50.
116. Renton J, Kincaid S, Ehrlich PF. Should helical CT scanning of the thoracic cavity replace the conventional chest X-ray as a primary assessment tool in pediatric trauma? An efficacy and cost analysis. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38:793-7.
117. Kaups KL, Davis JW, Parks SN. Routinely repeated computed tomography after blunt head trauma: does it benefit patients? J Trauma 2004;56:475-80.
118. Durham SR, Liu KC, Seiden NR. Utility of serial computed tomography imaging in pediatric patients with head trauma. J Neurosurg 2006;105:365-9.
119. Maytal J, Krauss JM, Novak G, Nagelberg J, Patel M. The role of brain computed tomography in evaluating children with new onset of seizures in the emergency department. Epilepsia 2000;41:950-4.
120. Dzienis W, Tarasow E, Kochanowicz J, Szulc A, Walecki J, Kubas B. Utility of computed tomography and selected MR sequences in the diagnostics of patients with partial epileptic attacks. Med Sci Monit 2007;13(Suppl 1):49-54.
121. Lewis DW, Dorbad D. The utility of neuroimaging in the evaluation of children with migraine or chronic daily headache who have normal neurological examinations. Headache 2000;40:629-32.
122. Katz SI, Saluja S, Brink JA, Forman HP. Radiation dose associated with unenhanced CT for suspected renal colic: impact of repetitive studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1120-4.
123. Ripolles T, Agramunt M, Errando J, Martinez MJ, Coronel B, Morales M. Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography us unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients. Eur Radiol 2004;14:129-36.
124. Catalano O, Nunziata A, Altei F, Siani A. Suspected ureteral colic: primary helical CT versus selective helical CT after unenhanced radiography and sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:379-87.
125. Costantino TG, Bruno EC, Handly N, Dean AJ. Accuracy of emergency medicine ultrasound in the evaluation of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Emerg Med 2005;29: 455-60.
126. Vidakovic R, Feringa HH, Kuiper RJ, Karagiannis SE, Schouten O, Dunkelgrun M, et al. Comparison with computed tomography of two ultrasound devices for diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Am J Cardiol 2007;100:1786-91.
127. Stephen AE, Segev DL, Ryan DP, Mullins ME, Kim SH, Schnitzer JJ, et al. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis in a pediatric population: to CT or not to CT. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38:367-71.
128. Partrick DA, Janik JE, Janik JS, Bensard DD, Karrer FM. Increased CT scan utilization does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of appendicitis in children. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38:659-62.
129. Garcia Pena BM, Cook EF, Mandl KD. Selective imaging strategies for the diagnosis of appendicitis in children. Pediatrics 2004;113:24-8.
130. Smink DS, Finkelstein JA, Garcia Pena BM, Shannon MW, Taylor GA, Fishman SJ. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in children using a clinical practice guideline. J Pediatr Surg 2004;39:458-63, Discussion.
131. Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 2004;231:393-8.
132. Diederich S. Radiation dose in helical CT for detection of pulmonary embolism. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1491-3.
133. The Royal Society of London. Risk Assessment: a Study Group Report. London, UK: The Royal Society of London; 1983.
134. Lee CI, Flaster HV, Haims AH, Monico EP, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: institutional informed consent guidelines and practices at academic medical centers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:282-7.
135. Larson DB, Rader SB, Forman HP, Fenton LZ. Informing parents about CT radiation exposure in children: it's OK to tell them. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:271-5.
136. Ludwig RL, Turner LW. Effective patient education in medical imaging: public perceptions of radiation exposure risk. J Allied Health 2002;31:159-64.
137. Broadbent MV, Hubbard LB. Science and perception of radiation risk. Radiographics 1992;12:381-92.
138. Hendee WR. Personal and public perceptions of radiation risks. Radiographics 1991;11:1109-19.
139. Royal College of Radiologists. Standards for patient consent particular to radiology. London, UK: The Board of the Faculty of Clinical Radiology. The Royal College of Radiologists; 2005.
140. Chesson RA, McKenzie GA, Mathers SA. What do patients know about ultrasound, CT and MRI? Clin Radiol 2002;57:477-82.
141. Mackenzie I. Breast cancer following multiple fluoroscopies. Br J Cancer 1965;19:1-8.
142. Miller AB, Howe GR, Sherman GJ, Lindsay JP, Yaffe MJ, Dinner PJ, et al. Mortality from breast cancer after irradiation during fluoroscopic examinations in patients being treated for tuberculosis. N Engl J Med 1989;321:1285-9.
143. Boice JD Jr, Preston D, Davis FG, Monson RR. Frequent chest X-ray fluoroscopy and breast cancer incidence among tuberculosis patients in Massachusetts. Radiat Res 1991;125:214-22.