Many assumptions are made when imaging children. In particular a judgement is
made regarding how safe or unsafe each imaging modality is, using relatively
arbitrary definitions and distinctions, due to the lack of robust scientific
data. Here, the latest evidence is reviewed, particularly regarding the medical
exposure to ionizing radiation (X-rays and CT) and MRI in childhood. The best
evidence currently available suggests a small but convincing risk of cumulative
low-dose ionizing radiation in children. Given our predictions for the children
imaged today, it seems reasonable to pursue non-ionizing-based techniques
wherever possible, although there is emerging evidence that MRI and ultrasound
may have hitherto unknown effects. As our knowledge base expands, we must
continually review our practice in light of the latest scientific data.
European Commission,
Directorate-General for the Environment 2000. Radiation
Protection 118. Referral guidelines for
imaging. Luxembourg:
Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, 2001
StraussKJ, GoskeMJ, KasteSC.
Image gently: Ten steps you can take to optimize image
quality and lower CT dose for pediatric patients. Am
J Roentgenol2010;194:868–73
SchechtmanE.Odds ratio, relative risk, absolute risk reduction, and the
number needed to treat-which of these should we use?Value Health2002;5:431–6
6.
National Council on Radiation
Protection & Measurements (NRCP). Report No 171 - Uncertainties
in the Estimation of Radiation Risks and Probability of Disease Causation
(2012). See http://www.ncrppublications.org/Reports/171
7.
ShuryakI, SachsRK, BrennerDJ.
A new view of radiation-induced cancer.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry2011;143:358–64
8.
PrestonDL, CullingsH, SuyamaA.
Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in
utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer
Ins2008;100:428–36
9.
PearceMS, SalottiJA, LittleMP.
Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent
risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort
study. Lancet2012;380:499–505
EinsteinAJ.
Beyond the bombs: cancer risks of low-dose medical
radiation. Lancet2012;380:455–7
12.
KimKP, BerringtondeGonzalezA, PearceMS.
Development of a database of organ doses for paediatric and
young adult CT scans in the United Kingdom. Radiat
Prot Dosimetry2012;150:415–26
13.
BrennerD, EllistonC, HallE.
Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from
pediatric CT. Am J Roentgenol2001;176:289–96
14.
ChodickG, RonckersCM, ShalevV.
Excess lifetime cancer mortality risk attributable to
radiation exposure from computed tomography examinations in
children. Isr Med Assoc J2007;9:584–7
15.
BernieMO, RehelJL, BreisseHJ.
Radiation exposure from CT in early childhood: a French
large-scale multicentre study. Br J Radiol2012;85:53–60
16.
PearceMS, SalottiJA, HoweNL.
CT scans in young people in Great Britain: temporal and
descriptive patterns, 1993–2002. Radiol Res
Pract2012;2012:594278
17.
International Agency for Research
on Cancer. EPI-CT International Pediatric CT Scan Study. See
http://epi-ct.iarc.fr/
18.
RajaramanP, SimpsonJ, NetaG.
Early life exposure to diagnostic radiation and ultrasound
scans and risk of childhood cancer: case-control study.
BMJ2010;342:d472
19.
DollR, WakefordR.Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation.
Br J Radiol1997;70:130–9
20.
WakefordR, LittleMP.
Risk coefficients for childhood cancer after intrauterine
irradiation: a review. Int J Radiat Biol2003;79:293–309
21.
Catling-PaullC,
JohnstonR, RyanC.
Clinical interventions that increase the uptake and success
of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic
review. J Adv Nurs2011;67:1646–61
22.
MooreMM, ShearerDR.
Fetal dose estimates for CT pelvimetry.
Radiology1989;171:265–7
23.
AngES, GluncicV, DugueA.
Prenatal exposure to ultrasound waves impacts neuronal
migration in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2006;103:12903–10
24.
AbramowiczJS.
Prenatal exposure to ultrasound waves: is there a
risk?Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol2007;29:363–7
25.
BrennerDJ.
Slowing the increase in the population dose resulting from CT
scans. Radiat Res2010;174:809–15
26.
KuboT, LinPJ, StillerW.
Radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a
review. Am J Roentgenol2008;190:335–43
27.
CohenMD.
CT radiation dose reduction: can we do harm by doing
good?Pediatr Radiol2012;42:397–8
28.
Olsen⊘E. Imaging of abdominal
tumours: CT or MRI?Pediatr Radiol2008;38:S452–8
29.
ArthursOJ, EdwardsA, AustinT.
The challenges of neonatal magnetic resonance
imaging. Pediatr Radiol2012;42:1182–94
30.
SerafiniG, ZadraN.Anaesthesia for MRI in the paediatric patient.
Curr Opirt Anaesthesiol2008;21:499–503
31.
Schulte-UentropL,
GoepfertMS.
Anaesthesia or sedation for MRI in children.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol2010;23:513–7
32.
EdwardsAD, ArthursOJ.
Paediatric MRI under sedation: is it
necessary?What is the evidence for the alternatives? Pediatr Radiol2011;41:1353–64
33.
Medicines and Healthcare Products
Regulatory Agency. Drug Safety Update 2010 Vol
3 Issue 6
PrinceMR, ZhangHL, ProwdaJC.
Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and its impact on abdominal
imaging. Radiographics2009;29:1565–74
36.
MendichovszkyIA,
MarksSD, SimcockCM.
Gadolinium and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: time to tighten
practice. Pediatr Radiol2008;38:489–96
37.
KarcaaltincabaM,
OguzB, HalilogluM.Current status of contrast-induced nephropathy and nephrogenic
systemic fibrosis in children. Pediatr
Radiol2009;39 (Suppl.
3):382–4
38.
ThomsenHS, MarckmannP, LogagerVB.
Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF): a late adverse reaction
to some of the gadolinium based contrast agents.
Cancer Imaging2007;24:130–7
DillmanJR, EllisJH, CohanRH.
Frequency and severity of acute allergic-like reactions to
gadolinium-containing i.v. contrast media in
children and adults. Am J Roentgenol2007;189:1533–8
41.
DillmanJR, StrousePJ, EllisJH.
Incidence and severity of acute allergic-like reactions to
i.v. nonionic iodinated contrast material in
children. Am J Roentgenol2007;188:1643–7
42.
ShellockFG.
Magnetic resonance safety update 2002: implants and
devices. J Magn Reson Imaging2002;16:485–96
43.
StokowskiLA.
Ensuring safety for infants undergoing magnetic resonance
imaging. Adv Neonatal Care2005;5:14–27
44.
HartwigV, GiovannettiG,
VanelloN.
Biological effects and safety in magnetic resonance imaging:
a review. Int J Environ Res Public Health2009;6:1778–98
45.
LeszczynskiD,
de
PomeraiD, KoczanD.
Five years later: The current status of the use of proteomics
and transcriptomics in EMF research.
Proteomics2012;12:2493–509
46.
ChakeresDW, de
VochtF.Static magnetic field effects on human subjects related to
magnetic resonance imaging systems. Prog Biophys Mol
Biol2005;87:255–65
47.
de
VochtF, van
DroogeH, EngelsH.
Exposure, health complaints and cognitive performance among
employees of an MRI scanners manufacturing department.
J Magn Reson Imaging2006;23:197–204
48.
MyakoshiJ, Effects of a static
magnetic field at the cellular level. Prog Biophys
Mol Biol2005;87:213–23
49.
NakaharaT, YaguchiH, YoshidaM.
Effects of exposure of CHO-K1 cells to a 10-T static magnetic
field. Radiology2002;224:817–22
50.
HighWB, SikoraJ, UqurbilK.
Subchronic in vivo effects of a high static magnetic field
(9.4 T) in rats. J Magn Reson Imaging2000;12:122–39
51.
ZarembaLA.
Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff. Criteria for Significant
Risk Investigations of Magnetic Resonance Diagnostic Devices. Silver Spring,
MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Food and Drug Administration, 2003. See http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ode/guidance/793.pdf
International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC). International standard, medical equipment-part 2:
particular requirements for the safety of magnetic resonance equipment for
medical diagnosis. 2nd edn. Geneva: IEC, 2002
54.
WangZ, LinJC, MaoW.
SAR and temperature: simulations and comparison to regulatory
limits for MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging2007;26:437–41
55.
KussmanDC, MulkernRV, HolzmanRS.
Iatrogenic hyperthermia during cardiac magnetic resonance
imaging. Anesth Analg2004;99:1053–5
56.
BryanYF, TempletonTW, NickTG.
Brain magnetic resonance imaging increases core body
temperature in sedated children. Anesth
Analg2006;102:1674–9
57.
MachataAM, WillschkeH, KabonB.
Effect of brain magnetic resonance imaging on body core
temperature in sedated infants and children. Br J
Anaesth2009;102:385–9
58.
DagiaC, DitchfleldM.3T MRI in paediatrics: challenges and clinical
applications. Eur J Radiol2008;68:309–19
59.
ReevesMJ, BrandrethM, WhitbyEH.
Neonatal cochlear function: measurement after exposure to
acoustic noise during in utero MR imaging.
Radiology2010;257:802–9
60.
YinE, NelsonDO, ColemanMA.
Gene expression changes in mouse brain after exposure to
low-dose ionizing radiation. Int J Radial
Biol2003;79:759–75
61.
BerglundSR, RockeDM, DaiJ.
Transient genome-wide transcriptional response to low-dose
ionizing radiation in vivo in humans. Int J Radiat
Oncol Biol Phys2008;70:229–34
62.
AliMA.
Magnetic resonance imaging and associated alteration in some
biophysical properties of blood. Rom J
Biophys2007;17:277–86
63.
SimiS, BallardinM, CasellaM.
Is the genotoxic effect of magnetic resonance negligible? Low
persistence of micronucleus frequency in lymphocytes of individuals after
cardiac scan. Mutat Res2008;645:39–43
64.
BonassiS, ZnaorA, CeppiM.
An increased micronucleus frequency in peripheral blood
lymphocytes predicts the risk of cancer in humans.
Carcinogenesis2007;28:625–31
65.
KimuraT, TakahashiK, SuzukiY.
The effect of high strength static magnetic fields and
ionizing radiation on gene expression and DNA damage in Caenorhabditis
elegans. Bioelectromagnetics2008;29:605–14
66.
International Commission on
Radiological Protection (ICRP). ICRP Publication 103. The 2007
Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann
ICRP 2007;37(2–4).
See http://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20103
67.
LinetMS, SlovisTL, MillerDL.
Cancer risks associated with external radiation from
diagnostic imaging procedures. Cancer J
Clin2012;62:75–100
