Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2009 Jul 13;169(13):1188-94.
doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.162.

Coronary artery calcification screening: estimated radiation dose and cancer risk

Kwang Pyo Kim  1 , Andrew J Einstein, Amy Berrington de González
Affiliations
Review

Coronary artery calcification screening: estimated radiation dose and cancer risk

Kwang Pyo Kim et al. Arch Intern Med. .

Abstract

Background: Multidetector computed tomography has been proposed as a tool for routine screening for coronary artery calcification in asymptomatic individuals. As proposed, such screening could involve tens of millions of individuals, but detailed estimates of radiation doses and potential risk of radiation-induced cancer are not currently available. We estimated organ-specific radiation doses and associated cancer risks from coronary artery calcification screening with multidetector computed tomography according to patient age, frequency of screening, and scan protocol.

Methods: Radiation doses delivered to adult patients were calculated from a range of available protocols using Monte Carlo radiation transport. Radiation risk models, derived using data from Japanese atomic bomb survivors and medically exposed cohorts, were used to estimate the excess lifetime risk of radiation-induced cancer.

Results: The radiation dose from a single coronary artery calcification computed tomographic scan varied more than 10-fold (effective dose range, 0.8-10.5 mSv) depending on the protocol. In general, higher radiation doses were associated with higher x-ray tube current, higher tube potential, spiral scanning with low pitch, and retrospective gating. The wide dose variation also resulted in wide variation in estimated radiation-induced cancer risk. Assuming screening every 5 years from the age of 45 to 75 years for men and 55 to 75 years for women, the estimated excess lifetime cancer risk using the median dose of 2.3 mSv was 42 cases per 100 000 men (range, 14-200 cases) and 62 cases per 100 000 women (range, 21-300 cases).

Conclusions: These radiation risk estimates can be compared with potential benefits from screening, when such estimates are available. Doses and therefore risks can be minimized by the use of optimized protocols.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Estimated lifetime risk of radiation-induced cancer (per 100,000 persons) from a single CT scan to assess CAC, by age at screening
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Burger IM, Kass NE, Sunshine JH, Siegelman SS. The use of CT for screening: a national survey of radiologists’ activities and attitudes. Radiology. 2008;248(1):160–168. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht HS, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient - Part III: Executive summary of the Screening for Heart Attack Prevention and Education (SHAPE) task force report. American Journal of Cardiology. 2006;98(2A):2H–15H. - PubMed
    1. Waugh N, Black C, Walker S, McIntyre L, Cummins E, Hillis G. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of computed tomography screening for coronary artery disease: systematic review. Health Technology Assessment. 2006;10(39) - PubMed
    1. Land CE. Statistical limitations in relation to sample-size. Environmental Health Perspectives. 1981;42:15–21. Dec. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2003;100(24):13761–13766. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms