Body CT scanning in young adults: examination indications, patient outcomes, and risk of radiation-induced cancer.

PURPOSE To quantify patient outcome and predicted cancer risk from body computed tomography (CT) in young adults and identify common indications for the imaging examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective multicenter study was HIPAA compliant and approved by the institutional review boards of three institutions, with waiver of informed consent. The Research Patient Data Registry containing patient medical and billing records of three university-affiliated hospitals in a single metropolitan area was queried for patients 18-35 years old with a social security record who underwent chest or abdominopelvic CT from 2003 to 2007. Patients were analyzed according to body part imaged and scanning frequency. Mortality status and follow-up interval were recorded. The Biologic Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII method was used to calculate expected cancer incidence and death. Examination indication was determined with associated ICD-9 diagnostic code; 95% confidence intervals for percentages were calculated, and the binomial test was used to compare the difference between percentages. RESULTS In 21 945 patients, 16 851 chest and 24 112 abdominopelvic CT scans were obtained. During the average 5.5-year (± 0.1 [standard deviation]) follow-up, 7.1% (575 of 8057) of chest CT patients and 3.9% (546 of 13 888) of abdominal CT patients had died. In comparison, the predicted risk of dying from CT-induced cancer was 0.1% (five of 8057, P < .01) and 0.1% (eight of 12 472, P < .01), respectively. The most common examination indications were cancer and trauma for chest CT and abdominal pain, trauma, and cancer for abdominopelvic CT. Among patients without a cancer diagnosis in whom only one or two scans were obtained, mortality and predicted risk of radiation-induced cancer death were 3.6% (215 of 5914) and 0.05% (three of 5914, P < .01) for chest CT and 1.9% (219 of 11 291) and 0.1% (six of 11 291, P < .01) for abdominopelvic CT. CONCLUSION Among young adults undergoing body CT, risk of death from underlying morbidity is more than an order of magnitude greater than death from long-term radiation-induced cancer.

[1]  C. Sadow,et al.  Frequent body CT scanning of young adults: indications, outcomes, and risk for radiation-induced cancer. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[2]  Adrian K. Dixon,et al.  Benefits and costs, an eternal balance , 2007 .

[3]  D. Frush.  Review of radiation issues for computed tomography. , 2004, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[4]  C. Auerbach.  Effects of Atomic Radiation , 1958, Nature.

[5]  J R Hoffman,et al.  Validity of a set of clinical criteria to rule out injury to the cervical spine in patients with blunt trauma. National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study Group. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  L. Tanoue.  Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure , 2009 .

[7]  Stephanie Lamart,et al.  Proportion of second cancers attributable to radiotherapy treatment in adults: a cohort study in the US SEER cancer registries. , 2011, The Lancet. Oncology.

[8]  R. Nelson,et al.  Radiation dose for body CT protocols: variability of scanners at one institution. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  Richard Wakeford,et al.  Risks associated with low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation: why linearity may be (almost) the best we can do. , 2009, Radiology.

[10]  P. Shrimpton,et al.  Assessment of Patient Dose in CT , 2004 .

[11]  C. Land,et al.  Incidence of female breast cancer among atomic bomb survivors, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1950-1990. , 1987, Radiation research.

[12]  Steven P. Cohen,et al.  Management of low back pain , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  E. Hall,et al.  Radiobiology for the radiologist , 1973 .

[14]  A. Guha.  The Canadian C-Spine Rule for Radiography in alert and Stable Trauma Patients , 2002 .

[15]  M. Kalra,et al.  Radiation Dose Reduction With Chest Computed Tomography Using Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique: Initial Experience , 2010, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[16]  David J. Brenner,et al.  Radiation exposure from medical imaging: time to regulate? , 2010, JAMA.

[17]  I. Stiell,et al.  Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. , 1994, JAMA.

[18]  J. Valentin,et al.  Managing patient dose in multi-detector computed tomography(MDCT). ICRP Publication 102. , 2007, Annals of the ICRP.

[19]  George A Wells,et al.  The Canadian CT Head Rule for patients with minor head injury , 2001, The Lancet.

[20]  A. Einstein,et al.  Impact of reduced patient life expectancy on potential cancer risks from radiologic imaging. , 2011, Radiology.

[21]  A. Levy.  Radiation Doses from Small-Bowel Follow-Through and Abdominopelvic MDCT in Crohn's Disease , 2008 .

[22]  J. Amorosa,et al.  Do clinicians use the American College of Radiology Appropriateness criteria in the management of their patients? , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[23]  A. Elster,et al.  Effective Doses in Radiology and Diagnostic Nuclear Medicine: A Catalog , 2010 .

[24]  E. Paulson,et al.  Radiation dose to the female breast from 16-MDCT body protocols. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[25]  T. Yoshizumi,et al.  Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources--1950-2007. , 2009, Radiology.

[26]  T. Mills,et al.  Indications for computed tomography in patients with minor head injury. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  Henry C. Chueh,et al.  Calculating the Benefits of a Research Patient Data Repository , 2006, AMIA.

[28]  S. T. G. Roup,et al.  Correction: Validity of a Set of Clinical Criteria to Rule out Injury to the Cervical Spine in Patients with Blunt Trauma. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  D. Sahani,et al.  Reducing Abdominal CT Radiation Dose With Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique , 2010, Investigative radiology.

[30]  Walter Huda,et al.  Effective dose: a useful concept in diagnostic radiology. , 2007, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[31]  M Tubiana,et al.  The debate on the use of linear no threshold for assessing the effects of low doses , 2006, Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection.