eccb2006

X-rays

A new study reported on Monday that the total radiation exposure given by medical imaging after a heart attack found that the average patient receives an equivalent of 725 chest X-rays before leaving the hospital. The study is the first of its kind, and the numbers are extravagant. The cumulative amount of radiation exposure from 725 chest X-rays is one third the amount allowed for nuclear plant workers per year.

The problem is that doctors do not consider the cumulative effect of these tests as they order each one separately. Doctors reading the study will likely be hit with a dose of reality. A patient admitted to an academic hospital with a heart attack had an average radiation dose of 14.5 millisieverts, 5 times more than what an average American can expect to receive from ground radon or airline flights.

The study likely will change doctors’ views on the different doses of radiation that each test gives and force them to reconsider testing patterns that they use for common diagnoses.

Despite the scary numbers, there is no proof that such high amounts of radiation is enough to increase the risk for cancer. Even so, one-third of imaging tests are performed in the treatment and diagnosis of heart disease. This radiation is necessary to doctors in order to diagnose and determine the problems in the heart (such as artery blockage and blood flow).

The study gathered information and data from over 64,000 patients in 49 hospitals throughout all of the United States for a period of over three years. Researchers claimed that most patients undergo and average of about 4 tests per stay (most of which are X-rays, CT scans, and cardiac catheterizations).

The new findings should not be cause for immediate alarm, however, as the biological effects of radiation at this level are still unknown. The tests are often necessary in the doctor’s process to diagnose and treat what can be a deadly condition. Conversely, the study should open eyes, especially in regards to allowing doctors to order tests for patients that are otherwise healthy. Since 1980, it is estimated by the American Heart Association that radiation exposure from medical tests has increased sevenfold.

Hopefully, the study encourages image equipment makers to develop new low-radiation CT scanners. In June, researchers reported that they had discovered a way to cut down radiation doses in a heart CT scam by half — without sacrificing the quality. This supposedly done by tailoring each scan to the specific weight and heart rate of each patient.