Summary: Cellular Response To Diagnostic Imaging

“Any chance that you may be pregnant? When was your last menstrual cycle?” These are critical questions that need to be asked within the imaging department. Radiation is not something that should be taken lightly. Radiation is when energy is emitted as a wave or particle that causes ionization. Ionizing radiation is what we are worried about especially for women during pregnancy. Only one cell has to be hit by radiation to cause a detrimental effect to a person. So you can see how important it is to try and keep pregnant mothers away from imaging departments in the healthcare field. The question is how much of a risk is it actually causing the patient when they are pregnant and coming into contact with radiation? How often does it actually

Pediatric imaging is one of the most controversial topics in the radiology field. When imaging any patient, dose, shielding, and risk versus benefit are important factors to consider. However, with pediatrics, those factors plus other considerations become especially important as we begin to consider how the radiation affects their growing cells. The ionizing radiation causes interactions with the atom causing the atom to become charged or ionized. Children are particularly vulnerable to ionizing radiation because their cells are constantly undergoing high rates of cell division. Which makes pediatric, individuals 18 and under, imaging and adult imaging incomparable. Pediatric imaging requires specific examinations, training, and quality of

Since then, X-rays have remained the primary technique used to locate embedded material in the body (Vogel & Dootz, 2007). However, X-rays do not provide information as to the biological condition of the tissue surrounding the embedded fragment (Fernandes et al., 2007; Helito et al., 2014). Extensive use of diagnostic X-rays can also lead to an increased risk of cancer later in life. Improvement in technology has decreased dose from plain film radiographs in comparison with decades past. This risk, albeit usually small, must be weighed against the benefit obtained from the information the X-rays

When the x-ray was first discovered, it caused leukemia in radiologists to increase exponentially. A study of physicians in 1935-1944 showed that the risk of a radiologist obtaining leukemia is eight times more likely than a regular physician (Ulrich). Surprisingly, children were also affected by x-rays. In 1955, Britain had more than a 50 percent increase in children dying of leukemia. The cause of death and abnormalities in these children were from x-rays. Operators around the world were performing unnecessary x-rays on women who were pregnant (Wasserman 127, 129-31). Studies performed by Dr. Irwin Bross on kids during 1959-1962 have shown that radiation in any form could tremendously affect the risks of leukemia in children. Radiation on the unborn child could raise the risk of leukemia 8.3 times in children ages 1-4 (Bross). The frequent exposure to x-rays like when feet for shoe sizes and body parts for hair removal are given x-rays, led to death, and sickness (Bookchin

Using X-rays for medical imaging is one of the most useful pieces of medical technology available when trying to determine and locate, the type and severity of a particular injury. X-rays are a form of electromagnetic radiation similar to visible light. However, unlike visible light x-rays can pass through most objects, including the body (NIBIB, n.d). The radiation hits a detector on the other side of the patient and the image produced is a shadowed representation of the tissues and structures in the body (NIBIB, n.d). However, due to the type of radiation being superimposed over the body it is worrying knowing that this form of radiation can, in some cases, cause some very life threatening mutations. The term used to describe the effective

Ionizing radiation is an important carcinogenic factor, exposure to radiation with high X-ray doses during breast development is critical. (51)

Computed Tomography (CT) is an excellent tool in the medical field for the detection of diseases and injuries. Since its initial introduction in the 1970s, it has revolutionized imaging techniques which were limited, and over time it has grown more powerful with advances in technology. These improvements have led to more detailed images, and faster imaging speeds, but it also led to a huge popularity among the technology. This popularity has spiked its usage over the last quarter of contrary, leading to better diagnosis’s and also exposing more patients and to multiple scan, with compounding radiation. The radiation in CT scans is much higher than natural exposure and even X-rays, which has led many scholar to view the technology as a possible concern over how much radiation it is exposing the public too. The review mentions a 2005 report, “CT scans only consisted of 11% of all medical x-ray exposures, but contributed to 67% of the general populations total radiation dose.” Those are staggering and worrisome figures especially when this radiation is compounded during other scans and

In order for CT scan to compute relevant images, ionizing ration must be used. People who are exposed to radiation are at a higher risk of developing cancer. Consequently, physicians must work diligently to minimize the amount of radiation that patients are exposed to. In order to so, there are several steps that clinicians can take. The steps are as indicated: the referring physician should be asked to justify the need for the radiation exposure; when an alternative to non-ionizing tool can be used, it should be used instead of CT; previously done images should never be repeated, but instead the results should be obtained to prevent unnecessary radiation exposure; education of referring clinicians, radiologist and the performing technicians regarding radiation doses; ensure scanner settings and parameters set to ensure lowest dose to achieve diagnostic images in all age ranges ( Stoodley and Phillip p.135). If these steps are followed, radiation exposure can be reduced while providing modernize care to patients.

Medical imaging is one of the most beneficial discoveries made in this century since it has provided medical professional with the visualisation of the internal structure of human body. This visualisation is of great significants to the medical professionals in diagnostics and the treatment of diseases. Imaging is obtained by using a source such as X-ray, ultrasound, gamma ray photons and magnetic fields. Since these sources obtain radiations that can be harmful for the body, it is important that the doses are being reduced. Each individual imaging technique provides the professionals with specific set of information, however, the ability of them to illustrate the details differs from each other significantly. As a result, a detailed picture would provide the most beneficial information for diagnoses of patients.

Increasing in accumulative radiation doses may lead to initiate or promote carcinogenesis that can cause damages to the patient. Therefore, there is compulsory to reduction of radiation dose by finding the alternative and to upgrading accuracy in imaging strategies (Martin & Semelka, 2007).

To protect the patient, the length of time that a patient remains in the path of the x-ray beam should be minimized. Therefore, it is important for radiographers to avoid unnecessary repeats and thus unnecessary exposure. Gonad shielding should be used on patients if possible, which is particularly important for young patients. In addition, proper collimations and adjusted exposure factors should be applied according to patient situations to minimize radiation dose (7).

Radiation procedures used to diagnose medical conditions over the past century have grown from a scientific curiosity to a pervasive, essential part of modern health care. Radiology originated with ionizing radiation to diagnose human disease, however since discovering the physiological risks associated with ionizing radiation, such as mutation/cancer, an ongoing controversy arises as to whether ionizing radiation should be used in medical diagnosis. This investigation will analyze each end of the argument continuum to determine if ionizing radiation should continue to be used in medical diagnosis.

Radiation, found in X rays has been used in clinical medicine since its discovery over two hundred years ago. Today, it is common knowledge that radiation can cause cancer and other genetic mutations within the body, but years ago people’s cells were being mutated by radiation without anything being done to regulate or impede it. The life-saving discovery, that radiation causes genetic mutations, came at the hands of Hermann Muller due to his dedication and pure love for genetics. Hermann Muller is a man of vast intellect who came into the public eye for his work in genetics, his role as an educator, his outspoken political standpoint, and his status as a Nobel Laureate. Through his background, actions, and legacy, Hermann Joseph Muller has

Since the technologies being used only bounce waves of the body surface, this leaves then skin highly exposed to concentrated amounts of radiation. Health side effect studies of full body scanners have been labeled classified and inaccessible to the general public. Four professors from the University of California- San Francisco, whom are well respected cancer, X-ray crystallographers and imaging experts stated in a letter to the Obama administration that, “The low-energy rays do a “Compton scatter” off tissue layers just under the skin, possibly exposing some vital areas and leaving the tissues at risk of mutation. When an X-ray Compton scatters, it doesn’t shift an electron to a higher energy level; instead, it hits the electron hard enough to dislodge it from its atom.” The authors note that this process is “likely breaking bonds,” which could cause mutations in cells and raise the risk of cancer (Johnston). Furthermore, the UCSF researchers write in their letter, “older passengers are more susceptible to mutagenic effects of X-rays, and “the risk of

They say the low level beam does deliver a slight dose of radiation to the body but because the beam concentrates on the skin, one of the most radiation-sensitive organs of the human body, that dose may be up to twenty times higher than first estimated. University of California biochemist David Agard is quoted saying “While the dose would be safe if it were distributed through the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high.” He adds, “Ionizing radiation such as the X-rays used in these scanners have the potential to induce chromosome damage, and that can lead to cancer.”