Radiation-related cancer risks in a clinical patient population undergoing cardiac CT

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 196, Issue 2, 2011, Pages

  Huda, Walter ^a   Schoepf, U Joseph ^a   Abro, Joseph A ^a   Mah, Eugene ^a   Costello, Philip ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Coronary CTA; Dose length product; Effective dose; Radiation cancer risk; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; BONE MARROW; BREAST; CANCER RISK; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIVER; LUNG; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; STOMACH;

ADULT; AGED; BODY BURDEN; COHORT STUDIES; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS, RADIATION-INDUCED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 79251476220     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.10.4981     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Einstein AJ. Medical imaging: the radiation issue. Nat Rev Cardiol 2009; 6:436-438
2. Gerber TC, Kantor B, McCollough CH. Radiation dose and safety in cardiac computed tomography. Cardiol Clin 2009; 27:665-677
3. Linton OW, Mettler FA Jr. National conference on dose reduction in CT, with an emphasis on pediatric patients. AJR 2003; 181:321-329
4. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography - an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277-2284
5. Hirai N, Horiguchi J, Fujioka C, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG-gated 64-detector coronary CT angiography: assessment of image quality, stenosis, and radiation dose. Radiology 2008; 248:424-430
6. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology 2008; 248:431-437
7. Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associated with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007; 298:317-323
8. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA 2009; 301:500-507
9. Huda W, Sterzik A, Tipnis S, Schoepf UJ. Organ doses to adult patients for chest CT. Med Phys 2010; 37:842-847
10. Jacobs JE, Boxt LM, Desjardins B, Fishman EK, Larson PA, Schoepf J. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography (CT). J Am Coll Radiol 2006; 3:677-685
11. Schroeder S, Achenbach S, Bengel F, et al. Cardiac computed tomography: indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements: report of a writing group deployed by the working group nuclear cardiology and cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008; 29:531-556
12. Stillman AE, Oudkerk M, Ackerman M, et al. Use of multidetector computed tomography for the assessment of acute chest pain: a consensus statement of the North American Society of Cardiac Imaging and the European Society of Cardiac Radiology. Eur Radiol 2007; 17:2196-2207 (Pubitemid 47102962)
13. Bastarrika G, Lee YS, Huda W, Ruzsics B, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. CT of coronary artery disease. Radiology 2009; 253:317-338
14. Bastarrika G, Thilo C, Headden GF, Zwerner PL, Costello P, Schoepf UJ. Cardiac CT in the assessment of acute chest pain in the emergency department. AJR 2009; 193:397-409
15. Flohr T, Stierstorfer K, Raupach R, Ulzheimer S, Bruder H. Performance evaluation of a 64-slice CT system with z-flying focal spot. Rofo 2004; 176:1803-1810
16. Hausleiter J, Meyer T. Tips to minimize radiation exposure. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2008; 2: 325-327
17. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. RadioGraphics 2002; 22:1541-1553
18. ImPACT. Accessed September 30, 2010 www.impactscan.org/ctdosimetry.htm.
19. Huda W, Tipnis S, Sterzik A, Schoepf UJ. Computing effective dose in cardiac CT. Phys Med Biol 2010; 55:3675-3684
20. Huda W, Ogden KM. Comparison of head and body organ doses in CT. Phys Med Biol 2008; 53: N9-N14
21. National Academy of Sciences Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) Report VII. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiations: time for reassessment? Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences, 2005
22. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007; 37:1-332
23. Radiation protection in medicine. ICRP Publication 105. Ann ICRP 2007; 37:1-63
24. Shrimpton PC, Hillier MC, Lewis MA, Dunn M. National survey of doses from CT in the UK: 2003. Br J Radiol 2006; 79:968-980
25. Huda W, Ogden KM, Khorasani MR. Converting dose-length product to effective dose at CT. Radiology 2008; 248:995-1003
26. Valentin J. Low-dose extrapolation of radiation-related cancer risk. Ann ICRP 2005; 35:1-140
27. McCollough CH, Guimaraes L, Fletcher JG. In defense of body CT. AJR 2009; 193:28-39
28. McCollough CH. Automatic exposure control in CT: are we done yet? Radiology 2005; 237:755-756
29. Semelka RC, Armao DM, Elias J Jr, Huda W. Imaging strategies to reduce the risk of radiation in CT studies, including selective substitution with MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 25:900-909