Article

Estimated radiation exposure from medical imaging in hemodialysis patients.

Medical Physics Department, University Hospital Maggiore della Carità, Corso Mazzini 18, Novara, Italy.
Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (Impact Factor: 9.47). 02/2011; 22(3):571-8. DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2010070784
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Radiation exposure accompanying medical imaging associates with cancer risk. Patients with recurrent or chronic diseases may be especially at risk, because they may undergo more of these procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the individual cumulative effective doses (CEDs), which quantify radiation from medical imaging procedures, in a cohort of 106 hemodialysis patients during a median follow-up of 3 years. We retrospectively calculated individual radiation exposures by collecting the number and type of radiologic procedures from hospital records. We also estimated organ doses for computed tomography procedures. The mean and median annual CEDs were 21.9 and 11.7 mSv per patient-year, respectively. The mean and median total CEDs per patient during the study period were 57.7 and 27.3 mSv, respectively. By radiation dose group, we classified 22 patients as low (<3 mSv/yr), 51 as moderate (3 to <20 mSv/yr), 22 as high (20 to <50 mSv/yr), and 11 as very high (≥50 mSv/yr). Seventeen patients had a total CED >100 mSv, a value associated with a substantial increase in risk for cancer-related mortality. Of the total CED,s 76% was a result of CT scanning. The annual CED significantly associated with age and transplant waitlist status. In summary, this study shows that a significant fraction of surviving hemodialysis patients during a 3-year period receives estimated radiation doses that may put them at an increased risk for cancer.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Roberta Matheoud, Jul 04, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
151 Views
  • Source
    Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 02/2011; 22(3):406-7. DOI:10.1681/ASN.2011010105 · 9.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Arteriovenous fistula has superior patency over other accesses, but vascular access intervention therapy (VAIVT) for stenosis or thrombosis still remain major reasons for hospital admission of dialysis patients. The aim of this study was to examine the usefulness of systematic evaluation of vascular access by color-Doppler ultrasound (CDUS). This study was a single-center observational design study. We planned screening CDUS to evaluate all vascular accesses once per year, and additionally, follow-up CDUS of post-interventional patients 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after their recent VAIVT. This systematic evaluation was started from September 2009. The observational period between September 2008 and August 2009 was defined as period A. The observational period between September 2009 and August 2010 was defined as period B. We compared the incidence of emergent VAIVT and X-ray exposure time during the period A to B. 131 patients with AV fistula were assigned. 13 patients were excluded due to death, hospital transfer or re-operation of their accesses. During period A, 57 VAIVTs were carried out, and 37 cases (65%) were emergent. During period B, 42 VAIVTs were carried out, and 11 cases (25%) were emergent. The incidence of emergent intervention therapy was lower during period B than period A (P < 0.001). The amount of X-ray exposure time per patient was decreased in patients who received VAIVT during both periods (P < 0.03). Systematic evaluation of vascular access by CDUS decreased the incidence of emergent VAIVT and X-ray exposure time.
    Therapeutic apheresis and dialysis: official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy 04/2012; 16(2):169-72. DOI:10.1111/j.1744-9987.2011.01038.x · 1.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although many patients undergoing kidney transplant are exposed to multiple examinations that increase cumulative effective doses (CEDs) of ionizing radiation, no data are available characterizing their total longitudinal radiation burden and relating radiation burden with risk factors for more exposure. We did a retrospective cohort study of 92 patients (mean age 52 years; range: 20-75 years) who underwent kidney transplant at University Hospital, Novara, Italy, that evaluated all following medical imaging procedures involving ionizing radiation undergone beginning June 2007, and all subsequent procedures through August 2011, at the centre. The mean and median annual CED were 17.2 and 4.9 millisieverts (mSv) per patient-year. The mean and median total CED per patient over the study period were 46.1 and 17.3 mSv, respectively. Twenty-eight and 12% of patients had total CED >50 and 100 mSv, values which are associated with a good or strong evidence of an increased cancer mortality risk, respectively. Computed tomography scanning accounted for 73% of the total CED. The annual CED was significantly higher in incident patients and in patients with ischaemic heart disease and cancer. In this institution, multiple testing of kidney transplant patients was common in many patients associated with high cumulative estimated doses of ionizing radiation.
    Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 05/2012; 27(9):3645-51. DOI:10.1093/ndt/gfs145 · 3.49 Impact Factor