Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:46:24.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Radiation protection in children undergoing medical imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2010

Heike E. Daldrup-Link
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Charles A. Gooding
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The discovery of the X-ray was one of the most significant advances in medicine. Use of X-ray modalities in medical care, including radiography, fluoroscopy and angiography, and computed tomography, account for the vast majority of diagnostic imaging procedures performed in adults and children. Despite the benefits, the principle concerns for medical imaging that uses X-rays are the real and potential biological consequences. The fundamental issues with the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle as it relates to the cost (or risk) benefit ratio have been discussed in depth previously. Suffice it to say that even while the benefits of medical imaging are often not well defined or understood, the decision to perform medical imaging must weigh heavily in favor of the benefit side of this equation. While the radiation risk cannot be eliminated, it can be reduced by familiarity with, and ultimately adaption of, strategies to reduce radiation exposure in children.

There are some fundamental considerations when addressing the topic of radiation protection. First there is the underlying assumption that there is no safe level of radiation. This is the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle. The ALARA principle is a consequence of the linear no-threshold model, where what we know occurs (e.g., a significantly increased risk of developing cancer) at higher levels of radiation exposure is extrapolated to lower levels of radiation. The next point is that the following material will address the stochastic (versus deterministic) risks of radiation.

Type
Chapter
Information
Essentials of Pediatric Radiology
A Multimodality Approach
, pp. 390 - 402
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amis, E, Butler, P, Applegate, Ket al. (2007) American College of Radiology paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 4, 272–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bader, D, Datz, H, Bartal, Get al. (2007) Unintentional exposure of neonates to conventional radiography in the neonatal intensive care units. J Perinatol 27, 579–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bai, YZ, Qu, RB, Wang, GDet al. (2006) Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusceptions by saline enema: a review of 5218 cases in 17 years. Am J Surg 192, 273–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bardo, D, Black, M, Schenk, Ket al. (2009) Location of the ovaries in girls from newborn to 18 years of age: reconsidering ovarian shielding. Pediatr Radiol 39, 253–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birnbaum, S (2008) Radiation safety in the era of helical CT: a patient-based protection program currently in place in two community hospitals in New Hampshire. J Am Coll Radiol 5, 714–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brenner, DJ, Doll, R, Goodhead, DTet al. (2003) Cancer risk attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100, 13761–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brody, AS, Frush, DP, Huda, Wet al. (2007) American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Radiology. Radiation risk to children from computed tomography. Pediatrics 120(3), 677–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, JV, Kyriou, JC, Pettet, Aet al. (2001) Key factors in the optimization of paediatric X-ray practice. Br J Radiol 74, 1032–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coursey, C, Frush, D, Yoshizumi, Tet al. (2008) Pediatric chest MDCT and tube current modulation: effect on radiation dose with breast shielding. Am J Roentgenol 190, 54–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, RL (2003) A new look at CT dose measurement: beyond CTDI. Med Phys 30, 1272–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, RGSpecial procedures (angiography): clinical practice. In 2006 Syllabus—Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Physics: From Invisible to Visible—The Science and Practice of X-Ray Imaging and Radiation Dose Optimization, ed. Frush, DP, Huda, W (Oak Brook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2006) pp. 203–9.Google Scholar
Fricke, BL, Donnelly, LF, Frush, DPet al. (2003) In-plane bismuth breast shields for pediatric CT: effects on dose and imaging quality using experimental and clinical data. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180, 407–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frush, DPPractical approach to manage radiation exposure. In Pediatric Imaging, 2nd edn., ed. Carty, H, Brunelle, F, Stringer, D, Kao, S (Berlin:Elsevier, 2005) pp. 33–44.Google Scholar
Frush, DPRadiation dose and image quality for pediatric CT: clinical considerations. In 2006 Syllabus—Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Physics: From Invisible to Visible—The Science and Practice of X-Ray Imaging and Radiation Dose Optimization, ed. Frush, DP, Huda, W (Oak Brook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2006) pp. 167–82.Google Scholar
Frush, DPMDCT in children: scan techniques and contrast issues. In MDCT from Protocols to Practice, ed. Kalra, MK, Saini, S, Rubin, GD (Milan: Springer Verlag Italia, 2008) pp. 333–54.Google Scholar
Frush, DP, Frush, KS, Oldham, KTet al. (2009) Imaging of acute appendicitis in children: EU versus US … or US versus CT? A North American perspective. Pediatr Radiol 39, 500–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaca, AM, Jaff, TA, Frush, DPet al. (2008) Radiation doses from small-bowel follow-through and abdomen/pelvis MDCT in pediatric Crohn disease. Pediatr Radiol 38(3), 285–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geleijns, J, Salvadó Artells, M, Veldkamp, WJet al. (2006) Quantitative assessment of selective in-plane shielding of tissues in computed tomography through evaluation of absorbed dose and image quality. Eur Radio, 16, 2334–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goske, MJ, Applegate, KE, Frush, DPet al. (2008) The image gently campaign: working together to change practice. Am J Roentgenol 190, 273–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greess, H, Lutze, J, Nomayr, Aet al. (2004) Dose reduction in subsecond multislice spiral CT examination of children by online tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 14, 995–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, EJ (2002) Lessons we have learned from our children: cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. Pediatr Radiol 32, 700–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, EJ (2009) Radiation biology for pediatric radiologists. Pediatr Radiol 39(Suppl. 1), S57–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernanz-Schulman, MFluoroscopy clinical practice: controlling dose and study quality—new challenges and opportunities. In 2006 Syllabus—Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Physics: From Invisible to Visible—The Science and Practice of X-Ray Imaging and Radiation Dose Optimization, ed. Frush, DP, Huda, W (Oak Brook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2006) pp. 133–9.Google Scholar
Hintenlang, KM, Williams, JL, Hintenlang, (2002) A survey of radiation dose associated with pediatric plain-film chest X-ray examinations. Pediatr Radiol 32, 771–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollingsworth, CL, Yoshizumi, TT, Frush, DPet al. (2007) Pediatric cardiac-gated CT angiography: assessment of radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(1), 12–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopper, KD, King, SH, Lobell, ME, TenHave, TR, Weaver, JS (1997) The breast: in-plane X-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT—shielding with bismuth radioprotective garments. Radiology 205, 853–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kalra, MK, Dang, P, Singh, Set al. (2007) Automatic patient centering for MDCT: effect on radiation dose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(2), 547–52.Google Scholar
Kalra, MK, Maher, MM, Toth, TLet al. (2004) Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 233, 649–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karmazyn, B, Frush, D, Applegate, Ket al. (2009) CT with a computer-simulated dose reduction technique for detection of pediatric nephroureterolithiasis: comparison of standard and reduced radiation doses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192, 143–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, S, Yoshizumi, TT, Frush, DP, Anderson-Evans, C, Toncheva, G (2009) Dosimetric characterisation of bismuth shields in CT: measurements and Monte Carlo simulations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 133(2), 105–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, CI, Forman, HP (2008) The hidden costs of CT bioeffects. J Am Coll Radiol 5(2), 78–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, DC, Rao, VM, Parker, Let al. (2008) Ownership or leasing of CT scanners by nonradiologist physicians: a rapidly growing trend that raises concern about self-referral. JACR 5, 1206–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Linet, MS, Kim, KP, Rajaraman, P(2009) Children's exposure to diagnostic medical radiation and cancer risk: epidemiologic and dosimetric considerations. Pediatr Radiol 39(Suppl. 1), S4–S26.CrossRef
McCollough, CH, Bruesewitz, MR, Kofler, JM (2006) CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 26, 503–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
,Medical News Today (Nov 26, 2008) Article: New CT scanner from Siemens Healthcare sets the bar higher. MediLexicon International Ltd. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/130930.php (last accessed Jan 22, 2010).
Mettler, FA, Thomadsen, BR, Bhargavan, Met al. (2008) Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 95, 502–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, DL, Blater, S, Cole, PEet al. (2003) Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study: part I: overall measures of dose. Vasc Interv Radiol 14(6), 711–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molen, AJ, Geleijns, J (2007) Overranging in multisection CT: quantification and relative contribution to dose – comparison of four 16-section CT scanners. Radiology 242(1), 208–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muhogora, WE, Ahmed, NA, Almosabihi, JSet al. (2008) Patient doses in radiographic examinations in 12 countries in Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe: initial results from IAEA projects. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190, 1453–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
,National Council on Radiation Protection and MeasurementsImplementation of the Principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) for Medical and Dental Personnel, 2nd reprinting, report no. 107 (Bethesda, MD: NCRP, 1997).
,National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (Jul 10, 2008) Press release: NCRP Executive Director, David A. Schauer, Participated in a WHO Global Initiative on “Radiation Safety in Health Care Settings.” NCRP, 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Bethesda, MD. www.ncrponline.org/Press_Rel/WHO_June2008.pdf (last accessed Dec 14, 2009).
Paolantonio, P, Ferrari, R, Vecchietti, F, Cucchiara, S, Laghi, A (2009) Current status of MR imaging in the evaluation of IBD in a pediatric population of patients. Eur J Radiol 69(3), 418–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson, A, Frush, DP (2007) Dose reduction in paediatric MDCT: general principles. Clin Radiol 62(6), 507–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paterson, A, Frush, DP, Donnelly, LF (2001) Helical CT of the body: are settings adjusted for pediatric scanning?AJR Am J Roentgenol 176(2), 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, DL, Cullings, H, Suyama, Aet al. (2008) Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer Inst 100, 428–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ptak, T, Rhea, JT, Novelline, RA (2003) Radiation dose is reduced with a single-pass whole-body multi-detector row CT trauma protocol compared with a conventional segmented method: initial experience. Radiology 229(3), 902–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riddell, AM, Khalili, K (2006) Assessment of acute abdominal pain: utility of a second cross-sectional imaging examination. Radiology 238, 570–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schauer, DA, Linton, OW (2009) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements report shows substantial medical exposure increase. Radiology 253(2), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaneyfelt, T, Center, R (2009) Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 301, 868–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, E, Silva, G (2007) Eliminating unenhanced CT when evaluating abdominal neoplasms in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189, 1211–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sistrom, CL, Dang, PA, Weilburg, JBet al. (2009) Effect of computerized order entry with integrated decision support on the growth of outpatient procedure volumes: seven-year time series analysis. Radiology 251(1), 147–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slovis, TL, Frush, DP (2007) Biological effects of diagnostic radiation on children. In Caffey's Pediatric Diagnostic Imaging, ed. Slovis, TL (Philadelphia:Mosby, 2007) pp. 3–12.Google Scholar
Strauss, KJ, Goske, MJ, Frush, DP, Butler, PF, Morrison, G (2009) Image Gently Vendor Summit: working together for better estimates of pediatric radiation dose from CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192(5), 1169–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Studdert, DM, Mello, MM, Sage, WMet al. (2005) Defensive medicine among high-risk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment. JAMA 293, 2609–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thierry-Chef, I, Simon, S, Miller, D (2006) Radiation dose and cancer risk among pediatric patients undergoing interventional neuroradiology procedures. Pediatr Radiol 36(2), 159–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, KE, Wang, B (2008) Age-specific effective doses for pediatric MSCT examinations at a large children's hospital using DLP conversion coefficients: a simple estimation method. Pediatr Radiol 38, 645–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, L (2006) Minimizing radiation injury and neoplastic effects during pediatric fluoroscopy: what should we know?Pediatr Radiol 36(2), 141–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frush, DP, Huda, W (2006) Categorical Course in Diagnostic Radiology Physics: From Invisible to Visible—The Science and Practice of X-Ray Imaging and Radiation Dose Optimization (Oak Brook, IL: Radiological Society of North America, 2006) pp. 7–241.Google Scholar
Strauss, KJ, Kaste, SC (2006) The ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept in pediatric interventional and fluoroscopic imaging. Pediatr Radiol 36(Suppl. 2), S107–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Annex D: medical radiation exposures. In Volume I: Sources of UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes (Vienna: UNSCEAR, 2000).
Willis, CE, Slovis, TL (2004) The ALARA concept in pediatric CR and DR. Pediatr Radiol 34(Suppl. 3), S159–247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×