Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Menu
  • Information
    • Previous
    Next
    Original Research

    Recurrent CT, Cumulative Radiation Exposure, and Associated Radiation-induced Cancer Risks from CT of Adults

    Published Online:Apr 1 2009https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2511081296

    Abstract

    Purpose: To estimate cumulative radiation exposure and lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of radiation-induced cancer from computed tomographic (CT) scanning of adult patients at a tertiary care academic medical center.

    Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board with waiver of informed consent. The cohort comprised 31 462 patients who underwent diagnostic CT in 2007 and had undergone 190 712 CT examinations over the prior 22 years. Each patient's cumulative CT radiation exposure was estimated by summing typical CT effective doses, and the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII methodology was used to estimate LAR on the basis of sex and age at each exposure. Billing ICD9 codes and electronic order entry information were used to stratify patients with LAR greater than 1%.

    Results: Thirty-three percent of patients underwent five or more lifetime CT examinations, and 5% underwent between 22 and 132 examinations. Fifteen percent received estimated cumulative effective doses of more than 100 mSv, and 4% received between 250 and 1375 mSv. Associated LAR had mean and maximum values of 0.3% and 12% for cancer incidence and 0.2% and 6.8% for cancer mortality, respectively. CT exposures were estimated to produce 0.7% of total expected baseline cancer incidence and 1% of total cancer mortality. Seven percent of the cohort had estimated LAR greater than 1%, of which 40% had either no malignancy history or a cancer history without evidence of residual disease.

    Conclusion: Cumulative CT radiation exposure added incrementally to baseline cancer risk in the cohort. While most patients accrue low radiation-induced cancer risks, a subgroup is potentially at higher risk due to recurrent CT imaging.

    © RSNA, 2009

    References

    • 1 Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007; 4: 272–284. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 2 Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277–2284. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 3 Mettler FA Jr, Thomadsen BR, Bhargavan M, et al. Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 2008;95:502–507. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 4 Wiest PW, Locken JA, Heintz PH, Mettler FA Jr. CT scanning: a major source of radiation exposure. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2002;23:402–410. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 5 Jaffe TA, Gaca AM, Delaney S, et al. Radiation doses from small-bowel follow-through and abdominopelvic MDCT in Crohn's disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:1015–1022. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 6 Broder J, Bowen J, Lohr J, Babcock A, Yoon J. Cumulative CT exposures in emergency department patients evaluated for suspected renal colic. J Emerg Med 2007;33:161–168. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 7 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;186:1120–1124. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 8 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. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 9 Huda W. Radiation doses and risks in chest computed tomography examinations. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2007;4:316–320. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 10 Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, Berdon W. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:289–296. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 11 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. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 12 Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, et al. The image gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:273–274. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 13 Shrimpton P. Assessment of patient dose in CT. NRPB-PE/1/2004. Chilton, England: National Radiological Protection Board, 2004. Google Scholar
    • 14 Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 2008;248:254–263. Link, Google Scholar
    • 15 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. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 16 Cohnen M, Poll LJ, Puettmann C, Ewen K, Saleh A, Modder U. Effective doses in standard protocols for multi-slice CT scanning. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1148–1153. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 17 UNSCEAR 2000. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation, 2000 Report to the General Assembly with Annexes. New York, NY: United Nations, 2000. Google Scholar
    • 18 Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Department of Health and Human Services. Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends: 2000 computed tomography. http://www.crcpd.org/Pubs/NextTrifolds/NEXT2000CT_T.pdf. Published April 2006. Accessed July 24, 2008. Google Scholar
    • 19 National Research Council Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Level of Ionizing Radiation. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII, Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006. Google Scholar
    • 20 Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100:13761–13766. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 21 Huda W, Vance A. Patient radiation doses from adult and pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:540–546. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 22 Huda W, Ravenel JG, Scalzetti EM. How do radiographic techniques affect image quality and patient doses in CT? Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2002;23:411–422. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 23 Martin CJ. Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures? Br J Radiol 2007;80:639–647. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 24 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AAPM report No. 96; the measurement, reporting, and management of radiation dose in CT. http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/RPT_96.pdf. Published Jan 2008. Updated April 2008. Accessed July 24, 2008. Google Scholar
    • 25 Brenner D, Huda W. Effective dose: a useful concept in diagnostic radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;128:503–508. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 26 McCollough CH. It is time to retire the computed tomography dose index (CTDI) for CT quality assurance and dose optimization: against the proposition. Med Phys 2006;33:1190–1191. Medline, Google Scholar
    • 27 Preston DL, Shimizu Y, Pierce DA, Suyama A, Mabuchi K. Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors: Report 13—solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950–1997. Radiat Res 2003;160:381–407. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 28 Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, et al. Risk of cancer after low doses of ionising radiation: retrospective cohort study in 15 countries. BMJ 2005;331:77. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 29 Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619–628. Link, Google Scholar
    • 30 McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. RadioGraphics 2006;26:503–512. Link, Google Scholar

    Article History

    Published in print: 2009