The U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation each conducted respective assessments of all radiation sources in the United States and worldwide. The goal of this article is to summarize and combine the results of these two publicly available surveys and to compare the results with historical information. In the United States in 2006, about 377 million diagnostic and interventional radiologic examinations and 18 million nuclear medicine examinations were performed. The United States accounts for about 12% of radiologic procedures and about one-half of nuclear medicine procedures performed worldwide. In the United States, the frequency of diagnostic radiologic examinations has increased almost 10-fold (1950-2006). The U.S. per-capita annual effective dose from medical procedures has increased about sixfold (0.5 mSv [1980] to 3.0 mSv [2006]). Worldwide estimates for 2000-2007 indicate that 3.6 billion medical procedures with ionizing radiation (3.1 billion diagnostic radiologic, 0.5 billion dental, and 37 million nuclear medicine examinations) are performed annually. Worldwide, the average annual per-capita effective dose from medicine (about 0.6 mSv of the total 3.0 mSv received from all sources) has approximately doubled in the past 10-15 years.

Medical radiation exposure of the U.S. population has not been systematically evaluated for almost 25 y. In 1982, the per capita dose was estimated to be 0.54 mSv and the collective dose 124,000 person-Sv. The preliminary estimates of the NCRP Scientific Committee 6-2 medical subgroup are that, in 2006, the per capita dose from medical exposure (not including dental or radiotherapy) had increased almost 600% to about 3.0 mSv and the collective dose had increased over 700% to about 900,000 person-Sv. The largest contributions and increases have come primarily from CT scanning and nuclear medicine. The 62 million CT procedures accounted for 15% of the total number procedures (excluding dental) and over half of the collective dose. Nuclear medicine accounted for about 4% of all procedures but 26% of the total collective dose. Medical radiation exposure is now approximately equal to natural background radiation.

Patients with a permanent pacemaker are currently restricted from diagnostic nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) imaging because of potential adverse effects on the pacemaker by the magnet. Previous work has shown that NMR imaging will result in asynchronous pacing of the pulse generator within a given distance of the magnet. The radiofrequency signal generated by the system may also result in rapid cardiac pacing, which may have deleterious effects. This study utilized a 1.5 tesla unit in an in vivo laboratory animal to evaluate the unit's effects on eight different pulse generators from two manufacturers. All pacemakers functioned in an asynchronous mode when placed within a certain distance of the magnet. In addition, transient reed switch inhibition was observed. Seven of the eight pulse generators paced rapidly when exposed to the radiofrequency signal and there was a dramatic decrease in arterial blood pressure. Whether effective rapid cardiac pacing would occur could not be predicted before exposure to the magnetic resonance unit. Nuclear magnetic resonance imaging with high magnetic fields in patients with a pacemaker should continue to be avoided until the mechanism of the rapid cardiac pacing can be further delineated and either predicted or prevented.

Reference values (RVs) are recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine for four radiographic projections, computed tomography, fluoroscopy, and dental radiography. RVs are used to compare radiation doses from individual pieces of radiographic equipment with doses from similar equipment assessed in national surveys. RVs recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine have been developed from the Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends survey performed by the state radiation protection agencies with the cooperation and support of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, and the American College of Radiology. The RVs selected by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine represent, approximately, the 80th percentile of the survey distributions. Consequently, equipment exceeding the RVs is using higher radiation doses than is 80% of the equipment in the surveys. Radiation doses for specific projections, with standard phantoms, should be measured annually, as recommended by the American College of Radiology. When the RVs are exceeded, the medical physicist should investigate the cause and determine, in cooperation with the responsible radiologist, whether these doses are justified or the imaging system should be optimized to reduce patient radiation doses. RVs are a useful tool for comparing patient radiation doses at institutions throughout the United States and for providing information about radiographic equipment performance.

This study evaluates the effect of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) scanning on pacemaker function. It must be emphasized that each manufacturer's pulse generators and each pacing modality may behave differently and, therefore, require individual evaluation. According to our results, patients with pacemakers should have their pacing activity monitored continuously during scanning with the NMR 1500 gauss imaging system. External pulse generators should be set to the asynchronous mode and placed outside the NMR image volume but within the radiofrequency (RF) shield. Implanted pacemakers should be verified for type and mode of operation. All implantable pulse generators evaluated reverted from the demand to the asynchronous mode within the magnetic field of the scanner. There was no observable damage to the discrete pacemaker components that were tested. In vivo testing of implantable single-chamber pulse generators did not significantly alter the pacemaker's operating parameters. Changes in stimulation rate analogous to the RF field pulse rate were seen. In single-chamber devices the resultant rate was a multiple of the RF frequency, changing to a value less than the normal asynchronous magnetic rate. With more sophisticated dual-chamber devices the results varied. With VDD pacing during RF scanning, the cardiac stimulation rate increased to a value analogous to the RF field modulation period. More extensive in vivo testing using different models of pulse generators of various manufacturers is needed to identify specific device susceptibility to the RF, time variance and steady-state magnet fields. From these data a comprehensive statement about NMR scanning of patients with implanted pacemakers can be made.