Korean J Radiol.  2015 Dec;16(6):1276-1282. 10.3348/kjr.2015.16.6.1276.

Determining and Managing Fetal Radiation Dose from Diagnostic Radiology Procedures in Turkey

• Ozbayrak M
• Cavdar I
• Seven M
• Uslu L
• Yeyin N
• Tanyildizi H
• Abuqbeitah M
• Acikgoz AS
• Tuten A
• Demir M

• KMID: 2344282
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2015.16.6.1276

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
We intended to calculate approximate fetal doses in pregnant women who underwent diagnostic radiology procedures and to evaluate the safety of their pregnancies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We contacted hospitals in different cities in Turkey where requests for fetal dose calculation are usually sent. Fetal radiation exposure was calculated for 304 cases in 218 pregnant women with gestational ages ranging from 5 days to 19 weeks, 2 days. FetDose software (ver. 4.0) was used in fetal dose calculations for radiographic and computed tomography (CT) procedures. The body was divided into three zones according to distance from the fetus. The first zone consisted of the head area, the lower extremities below the knee, and the upper extremities; the second consisted of the cervicothoracic region and upper thighs; and the third consisted of the abdominopelvic area. Fetal doses from radiologic procedures between zones were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test and a Bonferroni-corrected Mann-Whitney U-test.
RESULTS
The average fetal doses from radiography and CT in the first zone were 0.05 ± 0.01 mGy and 0.81 ± 0.04 mGy, respectively; 0.21 ± 0.05 mGy and 1.77 ± 0.22 mGy, respectively, in the second zone; and 6.42 ± 0.82 mGy and 22.94 ± 1.28 mGy, respectively, in the third zone (p < 0.001). Our results showed that fetal radiation exposures in our group of pregnant women did not reach the level (50 mGy) that is known to increase risk for congenital anomalies.
CONCLUSION
Fetal radiation exposure in the diagnostic radiology procedures in our study did not reach risk levels that might have indicated abortion.

Keyword

Fetus; Radiation effects; Computed tomography; Radiography

MeSH Terms

Female
Fetus/*radiation effects
Gestational Age
Head/radiation effects
Humans
Pregnancy
*Radiation Dosage
Radiation, Ionizing
Retrospective Studies
Risk
Software
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
Turkey

Reference

1. Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the radiologist. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott;2006.

2. Valetin J. Biological effects after prenatal irradiation (embryo and fetus). ICRP Publication 90. Ann ICRP. 2003; 33:9–200.

3. Busby C, Lengfelder E, Pflugbeil S, Schmitz-Feuerhake I. The evidence of radiation effects in embryos and fetuses exposed to Chernobyl fallout and the question of dose response. Med Confl Surviv. 2009; 25:20–40.

4. 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiogical Protection. Ann ICRP. 1991; 21:1–201.

5. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Pregnancy and medical radiation. ICRP Publication 84. Ann ICRP. 2000; 30(1):iii–viii. 1–43.

6. Brent RL. Saving lives and changing family histories: appropriate counseling of pregnant women and men and women of reproductive age, concerning the risk of diagnostic radiation exposures during and before pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 200:4–24.

7. Roux C, Horvath C, Dupuis R. Effects of pre-implantation low-dose radiation on rat embryos. Health Phys. 1983; 45:993–999.

8. Osei EK, Faulkner K. Fetal doses from radiological examinations. Br J Radiol. 1999; 72:773–780.

9. Osei EK, Darko JB, Faulkner K, Kotre CJ. Software for the estimation of foetal radiation dose to patients and staff in diagnostic radiology. J Radiol Prot. 2003; 23:183–194.

10. Osei EK, Darko J. Foetal radiation dose and risk from diagnostic radiology procedures: a multinational study. ISRN Radiol. 2012; 2013:318425.

11. ACOG Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 299, September 2004 (replaces No. 158, September 1995). Guidelines for diagnostic imaging during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2004. 104:p. 647–651.

12. Doll R, Wakeford R. Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation. Br J Radiol. 1997; 70:130–139.

13. Wang PI, Chong ST, Kielar AZ, Kelly AM, Knoepp UD, Mazza MB, et al. Imaging of pregnant and lactating patients: part 1, evidence-based review and recommendations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012; 198:778–784.

14. Hurwitz LM, Yoshizumi T, Reiman RE, Goodman PC, Paulson EK, Frush DP, et al. Radiation dose to the fetus from body MDCT during early gestation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006; 186:871–876.

15. Parmaksız A, Ataç GK, Bulgurlu F, Bulur E, Öncü T, İnal T. Unintentional irradiation of conceptus by diagnostic imaging examinations in Turkey. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2014; 162:322–328.

16. Karabulut N, Ariyürek M. Low dose CT: practices and strategies of radiologists in university hospitals. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006; 12:3–8.

17. Goo HW. CT radiation dose optimization and estimation: an update for radiologists. Korean J Radiol. 2012; 13:1–11.

18. Shin HJ, Chung YE, Lee YH, Choi JY, Park MS, Kim MJ, et al. Radiation dose reduction via sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction and automatic tube voltage modulation (CARE kV) in abdominal CT. Korean J Radiol. 2013; 14:886–893.

19. Crawley MT, Booth A, Wainwright A. A practical approach to the first iteration in the optimization of radiation dose and image quality in CT: estimates of the collective dose savings achieved. Br J Radiol. 2001; 74:607–614.

20. McCollough CH, Schueler BA, Atwell TD, Braun NN, Regner DM, Brown DL, et al. Radiation exposure and pregnancy: when should we be concerned? Radiographics. 2007; 27:909–917. discussion 917-918

21. Chaparian A, Aghabagheri M. Fetal radiation doses and subsequent risks from X-ray examinations: should we be concerned? Iran J Reprod Med. 2013; 11:899–904.

22. Asgari MA, Safarinejad MR, Hosseini SY, Dadkhah F. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of renal calculi during early pregnancy. BJU Int. 1999; 84:615–617.

23. Deliveliotis CH, Argyropoulos B, Chrisofos M, Dimopoulos CA. Shockwave lithotripsy in unrecognized pregnancy: interruption or continuation? J Endourol. 2001; 15:787–788.