Reduction of radiation dose of computed tomography in children with traumatic brain injury does not compromise the diagnosis and medical conduct

Authors

  • Mônica de Oliveira Bernardo PUC-SP/FCMS
  • Flávio Morgado
  • Fernando Antonio de Almeida PUC-SP/FCMS

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1984-4840201630712

Keywords:

radiation protection, health education, tomography, abnormalities, radiation-induced, head trauma

Abstract

Introduction: The worldwide increases in availability and request of computed tomography in children have brought concern about the cumulative effect of radiation. Traumatic brain injury is a clinical situation in which tomography is frequently necessary. Objectives: 1. Evaluating if the reduction of the radiation dose of head computed tomography in children with head trauma would affect the diagnosis and medical conduct; 2. Promoting a radioprotection campaign in a private health care system. Method: We selected two groups of computed tomography from children with head trauma: 30 performed before the study period, with usual doses of radiation; and 30 tomographies performed during the project, in which we applied the protocol of The Radiation Safety The Alliance for Imaging in Pediatric with 50% radiation dose reduction. The two series of exams were presented to 19 pediatricians, 2 neurosurgeons and 7 radiologists who were unaware of the technical differences and they answered a questionnaire. Results: The professionals had no difficulty in making a diagnosis and establish a conduct with both series of exams. Four participants noted more grainy images in the exams with lower radiation dose. A radioprotection campaign distributed 17,000 radioprotection wallets for children up to 12 years. Professionals involved and parents joined the campaign strongly and rationally. Conclusions: It is possible to reduce the computed tomography radiation dose for children with head trauma without any prejudice to the diagnosis and treatment. The radioprotection campaign was effective and well accepted by professionals and family and will become a national campaign.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography – an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277-84.

Rehani MM, Kushi JF. A study of smart card for radiation exposure history of patient. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(4):780-2.

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation. New York: UNSCEAR; 2013.

Naik KS, Ness LM, Bowker AM, Robinson PJ. Is computed tomography of the body overused? An audit of 2068 attendances in a large acute hospital. Br J Radiol. 1996;69(818):126-31.

Needham G. Making the best use of a department of clinical radiology – guidelines for doctors. Health Bull. 1996;54(5):406-9.

Mathews JD, Forsythe AV, Brady Z, Butler MW, Goergen SK, Byrnes GB, et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to computed tomography scans in childhood or adolescence: data linkage study of 11 million Australians. BMJ. 2013;346:f2360.

Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, Berdon W. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(2):289-96.

Shimizu Y, Kato H, Schull WJ. Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors. 9. Mortality, 1950-1985: Part 2. Cancer mortality based on the recently revised doses (DS86). Radiat Res. 1990;121(2):120-41.

Preston DL, Kusumi S, Tomonaga M, Izumi S, Ron E, Kuramoto A, et al. Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part III. Leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma, 1950-1987. Radiat Res. 1994;137(2 Suppl):S68-97.

Gordon SW, Schandorf C, Yeboah J. Optimization of radiation protection for the control of occupational exposure in Ghana. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2011;147(3):386-93.

Royal HD. Effects of low level radiation-what’s new? Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38(5):392-402.

World Health Organization; International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans: ionizing radiation, part I: X- and gamma (γ)- radiation, and neutrons. Lyon: IARC ; 2000. v. 75.

Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2012;380(9840):499-505.

American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® [Internet]. 2016 [Cited 2016 Dec 10] Available from: http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Appropriateness-Criteria

Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, Butler PF, Callahan MJ, Coley BD, et al. The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(2):273-4.

Alsuwaidi JS, Albalooshi LG, Alawadhi HM, Rahanjam A, Elhallag MA, Ibrahim JS, et al. Continuous monitoring of CT dose indexes at Dubai hospital. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(4):858-64.

Koizumi MS, Lebrão ML, Mello-Jorge MH, Primerano V. [Morbidity and mortality due to traumatic brain injury in São Paulo City, Brazil, 1997]. Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr. 2000;58(1):81-9.

Batlle JC, Hahn PF, Thrall JH, Lee SI. Patients imaged early during admission demonstrate reduced length of hospital stay: a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing cross-sectional imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7(4):269-76.

Paterson A, Frush DP. Dose reduction in paediatric MDCT: general principles. Clin Radiol. 2007;62(6):507-17.

Published

2017-01-23

How to Cite

1.
Bernardo M de O, Morgado F, Almeida FA de. Reduction of radiation dose of computed tomography in children with traumatic brain injury does not compromise the diagnosis and medical conduct. Rev. Fac. Ciênc. Méd. Sorocaba [Internet]. 2017Jan.23 [cited 2024Jul.3];18(4):221-7. Available from: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/RFCMS/article/view/30712

Issue

Section

Original Article