This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) View Online Appendix All Versions of this Article: j.jacc.2005.10.075v1 47/9/1846    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zanzonico, P. Articles by Strauss, H. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zanzonico, P. Articles by Strauss, H. W.

CLINICAL RESEARCH: CARDIAC IMAGING: VIEWPOINT

Radiation Exposure of Computed Tomography and Direct Intracoronary Angiography

Risk Has its Reward

Departments of Medical Physics and Radiology (Nuclear Medicine Section), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York

Manuscript received September 12, 2005; revised manuscript received October 6, 2005, accepted October 25, 2005.

^_* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. H. William Strauss, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, New York 10021. (Email: straussh{at}mskcc.org).

A hallmark of noninvasive testing has been the identification of patients with coronary artery disease. Now, with multislice computed tomography (MSCT), information about coronary anatomy can be obtained without the need for catheterization. A major concern with the application of MSCT coronary angiography is the radiation exposure to the patient. Both MSCT and selective coronary angiography share the risks of procedure-related complications, such as allergic contrast reactions, and stochastic risks (i.e., cancer induction) of low-level radiation. There is a substantially higher radiation dose for MSCT angiography (effective dose [ED] 14 mSv) than for CCA (ED 6 mSv). These exposures yield lifetimes risks of 0.07% and 0.02%, respectively, of inducing a fatal cancer in the general (i.e., age- and gender-averaged) population. However, CCA poses additional serious risks associated with cardiac catheterization, yielding a non-radiogenic risk of mortality—excluding contrast reactions—of 0.11%. Combining the radiogenic and non-radiogenic risks (0.02% and 0.11%, respectively) yields a 0.13% overall risk of mortality from CCA—nearly two-fold higher than that for MSCT angiography (0.07%). If one were to use the lower, more age-appropriate risk factors for the older patient population in question, the radiogenic risks of both CCA and MSCT would be reduced by about one-half, further widening the overall safety ratio of MSCT relative to CCA. When weighing the relative risks of alternative medical procedures, therefore, it is imperative that one consider the overall risk of the respective procedures.

Abbreviations and Acronyms   CCA = conventional coronary angiography   CT = computed tomography   CTDI = computed tomography dose index   DAP = dose-area product   ED = effective dose   MSAD = multiple-scan average dose   MSCT = multislice computed tomography   TLD = thermo luminescent dosimeter

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. C. Weustink, L. A. Neefjes, S. Kyrzopoulos, M. van Straten, R. Neoh Eu, W. B. Meijboom, C. A. van Mieghem, E. Capuano, M. L. Dijkshoorn, F. Cademartiri, et al. Impact of Heart Rate Frequency and Variability on Radiation Exposure, Image Quality, and Diagnostic Performance in Dual-Source Spiral CT Coronary Angiography Radiology, October 28, 2009; (2009) radiol.2533090358v1. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A. C. Weustink, N. R. Mollet, L. A. Neefjes, M. van Straten, E. Neoh, S. Kyrzopoulos, B. W. Meijboom, C. van Mieghem, F. Cademartiri, P. J. de Feyter, et al. Preserved Diagnostic Performance of Dual-Source CT Coronary Angiography with Reduced Radiation Exposure and Cancer Risk Radiology, July 1, 2009; 252(1): 53 - 60. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. C. Gerber, J. J. Carr, A. E. Arai, R. L. Dixon, V. A. Ferrari, A. S. Gomes, G. V. Heller, C. H. McCollough, M. F. McNitt-Gray, F. A. Mettler, et al. Ionizing Radiation in Cardiac Imaging: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiac Imaging of the Council on Clinical Cardiology and Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention Circulation, February 24, 2009; 119(7): 1056 - 1065. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Maruyama, M. Takada, T. Hasuike, A. Yoshikawa, E. Namimatsu, and T. Yoshizumi Radiation Dose Reduction and Coronary Assessability of Prospective Electrocardiogram-Gated Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography: Comparison With Retrospective Electrocardiogram-Gated Helical Scan J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 28, 2008; 52(18): 1450 - 1455. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G BEDETTI, N BOTTO, M G ANDREASSI, C TRAINO, E VANO, and E PICANO Cumulative patient effective dose in cardiology Br. J. Radiol., September 1, 2008; 81(969): 699 - 705. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W T Roberts, J J Bax, and L C Davies Cardiac CT and CT coronary angiography: technology and application Heart, June 1, 2008; 94(6): 781 - 792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. M. Kramer All High-Risk Patients Should Not Be Screened With Computed Tomographic Angiography Circulation, March 11, 2008; 117(10): 1333 - 1339. [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Stangl, V. Witzel, G. Baumann, and K. Stangl Current diagnostic concepts to detect coronary artery disease in women Eur. Heart J., March 2, 2008; 29(6): 707 - 717. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Abdulla, S. Z. Abildstrom, O. Gotzsche, E. Christensen, L. Kober, and C. Torp-Pedersen 64-multislice detector computed tomography coronary angiography as potential alternative to conventional coronary angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis Eur. Heart J., December 2, 2007; 28(24): 3042 - 3050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kumar, K. G. Bis, A. Shetty, A. Vyas, A. Anderson, M. Balasubramaniam, W. O'Neill, and W. Stein Aortic Root Catheter-Directed Coronary CT Angiography in Swine: Coronary Enhancement with Minimum Volume of Iodinated Contrast Material Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): W415 - W422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. R. Karsch, D. R. Coles, M. A. Smail, I. S. Negus, P. Wilde, M. Oberhoff, and A. Baumbach Reply J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 20, 2007; 49(7): 829 - 829. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. R. Conti Comparing Radiation Doses From 2 Diagnostic Tests J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 20, 2007; 49(7): 828 - 828. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. W. Strauss Reply J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 20, 2007; 49(7): 828 - 828. [Full Text] [PDF]