RadioGraphics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hall, E. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hall, E. J.

RadioGraphics, Vol 11, 509-518, Copyright © 1991 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Scientific view of low-level radiation risks

EJ Hall
Center for Radiological Research, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University, New York, NY 10032.

The average number of diagnostic x-ray procedures per year in the United States equals the total population and results in an annual collective effective dose equivalent of about 9 million person-rem. Possible deleterious effects include (a) genetic consequences, the risks of which can be assessed only from animal studies; (b) carcinogenesis, which can be assessed from survivors of nuclear bombings and patients exposed for medical reasons; and (c) effects on the developing embryo or fetus. For stochastic endpoints such as cancer and genetic anomalies, it is estimated that the current practice of radiology in the United States increases spontaneous frequency by less than 1%. No single procedure is likely to produce harm to the conceptus, but an accumulation of procedures in a pregnant woman could be hazardous during the sensitive period of 8-15 weeks after conception, with microcephaly and mental retardation the most likely deleterious effects. The balance of risk versus benefit in diagnostic radiology is heavily weighted toward benefit, but the risks are there, and constant efforts are needed to reduce radiation doses to the minimum necessary.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
J Ng and N Kitchen
Neurosurgery and pregnancy
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, July 1, 2008; 79(7): 745 - 752.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
D. K. Yousefzadeh, M. B. Ward, and C. Reft
Internal Barium Shielding to Minimize Fetal Irradiation in Spiral Chest CT: A Phantom Simulation Experiment.
Radiology, June 1, 2006; 239(3): 751 - 758.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
G. Y. El-Khoury, M. T. Madsen, M. E. Blake, and J. Yankowitz
A New Pregnancy Policy for a New Era
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2003; 181(2): 335 - 340.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. R. Prasad, C. Wittram, J.-A. Shepard, T. McLoud, and J. Rhea
Standard-Dose and 50%--Reduced-Dose Chest CT: Comparing the Effect on Image Quality
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2002; 179(2): 461 - 465.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOGRAPHICS RADIOLOGY RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1991 by the Radiological Society of North America.