Radiobiologic risk estimation from dental radiology

Underhill, Thomas E.; Chilvarquer, Israel; Kimura, Kazuyuki; Langlais, Robert P.; McDavid, William D.; Preece, John W.; Barnwell, George M.

doi:10.1016/0030-4220(88)90077-1

Cited by 65 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For each imaging procedure, all of the TLDs were simultaneously loaded within the phantom. Underhill et al (25) suggested embedding at least three dosimeters in the calvarium for the assessment of calvarial dosage. Therefore, we used four sensors so as to improve the accuracy of our tests.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dosimetry of Three Cone Beam Computerized Tomography Scanners at Different Fields of View in Terms of Various Head and Neck Organs

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMarketing new radiography devices necessitates documenting their absorbed X-ray doses. Since the current literature lacks studies on new devices, we assessed the doses of two new devices that had not previously been assessed.ObjectivesThe new devices were compared to the Promax three dimensional (3D) scanner at two fields of view (FOV) in nine critical head and neck tissues and organs.Materials and MethodsSeventeen thermoluminescence dosimeters positioned in an average-sized male RANDO phantom were used to determine the dosimetry of the three cone beam computerized tomography devices (NewTom VGi, NewTom 5G, and Promax 3D) at two field of views (FOVs), one small and one large. The exposure by each device per FOV was performed five times (30 exposures). The absorbed and effective doses were calculated for the thyroid, parotid, submandibular gland, sublingual gland, calvarium, cervical vertebra, trunk of the mandible, and mandibular ramus. The doses pertaining to the different devices, the FOVs, and the tissues were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon tests.ResultsThe average absorbed doses, respectively, for the large and small FOVs were 17.19 and 28.89 mGy in the Promax 3D, 19.25 and 35.46 mGy in the NewTom VGi, and 18.85 and 30.63 mGy in the NewTom 5G. The absorbed doses related to the FOVs were not significantly different (P value = 0.1930). However, the effective doses were significantly greater at the smaller FOVs / higher resolutions (P = 0.0039). The doses of the three devices were not significantly different (P = 0.8944). The difference among the nine organs/tissues was significant (Kruskal-Wallis P=0.0000).ConclusionThe absorbed doses pertaining to the devices and the FOVs were not significantly different, although the organs/tissues absorbed considerably different doses.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dosimetry of Three Cone Beam Computerized Tomography Scanners at Different Fields of View in Terms of Various Head and Neck Organs

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dose of radiation found to affect the children in the above study has another common usage, namely dental radiographs, which, since the advent of antifungal medication for treating tinea capitis, are the most common source of exposure of the head to ionizing radiation [32]. The first radiographic film packets were marketed in the second decade of this century, and since that time, the extent of exposure has been greatly decreased by reducing exposure times, increasing columnation of the radiation beam, and developing faster radiographic films [33][34][35]. Nevertheless, several types of dental radiographic examinations using potentially dangerous doses are still performed.…”

Section: Ionizing Radiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology and etiology of intracranial meningiomas: A review

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The frequency of meningiomas has been the topic of relatively few reports. Hospital-based brain tumor series indicate that the incidence is approximately 20% of all intracranial tumors; population-based studies indicate an overall incidence of 2.3/100,000. Although intracranial tumors as a whole show a higher prevalence in males than in females, meningiomas have a 2:1 female-to-male ratio. Between Caucasians and Africans, African-Americans, and Asians, certain differences also have been noted. Meningiomas in children are rare and differ from those in adults and other childhood tumors; they are even more rare in infants. Several features indicating etiologic factors have been identified, among which are ionizing radiation, head injury, hormones, and other receptor binding sites, genetic factors, and viruses. The most common source of exposure of the head to ionizing radiation is dental radiographic examination. Since 1922, head trauma has been considered a possible risk factor, but recent large studies do not support this link. Several factors have prompted studies of estrogens and progestogens as risk factors for meningiomas. Other studies have sought to determine if certain individuals have an inherited predisposition for developing a meningioma and/or if viruses, which may act alone or with other mutagens, figure into the formation of a meningioma. The most promising studies are those of cytogenetics, and future elucidation of factors associated with the loss of one copy of chromosome 22, another phenomenon that has been identified in meningiomas, may lead to screening tests and gene therapy.

show abstract

“… a Median value if mean is skewed to due combination of sparse and widely varying data b Data Extrapolated c Note: Panoramic examinations did not start commercially until the 1960s Sources: FMX: 1950s: Hudson and Kumpula 1955, Bailey 1957 1960s: Richards and Webber 1964, Winkler 1968 1970s: Greer 1972, Jerman et al 1973, Alcox and Jameson 1974 1980s: Richards and Colquitt 1981, Kircos et al 1987, Underhill et al 1988, Brand et al 1989, Bristow et al 1989 1990s: Avendanio et al 1996, Cederberg et al 1997 2000s: Lambrecht et al 2004, Ludlow et al 2008 Bitewing: 1960s: Richards 1964 1970s: Alcox and Jameson 1974, Lee 1974 1980s: Kircos et al 1987, Brand et al 1989 1990s: Velders et al 1991 (2), Avendanio et al 1996 2000s: Ludlow et al 2008, Dauer et al 2014 Panoramic: 1950s: Hudson and Kumpula 1955 1960s: Kuba and Beck 1968 1970s: Block et al 1977 1980s: Nilsson et al 1985, Underhill et al 1988, Bristow et al 1989 1990s: Dula et al 19982000s: Danforth and Clark 2000, Lecomber et al 2001, Gijbels et al 2001, Cohnen et al 2002, Lambrecht et al 2004, Ekestubbe et al 2004, Gavala et al 2009 …”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…1980s: Richards and Colquitt 1981, Kircos et al 1987, Underhill et al 1988, Brand et al 1989, Bristow et al 1989…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Thyroid Radiation Dose to Patients from Diagnostic Radiology Procedures over Eight Decades

Chang¹,

Miller

Lee

et al. 2017

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study summarizes and compares estimates of radiation absorbed dose to the thyroid gland for typical patients who underwent diagnostic radiology examinations in the years from 1930 to 2010. We estimated the thyroid dose for common examinations, including radiography, mammography, dental radiography, fluoroscopy, nuclear medicine, and computed tomography (CT). For the most part, we observed a clear downward trend in thyroid dose over time for each procedure. Historically, the highest thyroid doses came from the nuclear medicine thyroid scans in the 1960s (630 mGy), full-mouth series dental radiography (390 mGy) in the early years of the use of x-rays in dentistry (1930s), and the barium swallow (esophagram) fluoroscopic exam also in the 1930s (140 mGy). Thyroid uptake nuclear medicine examinations and pancreatic scans also gave relatively high doses to the thyroid (64 mGy and 21 mGy, respectively, in the 1960s). In the 21st century, the highest thyroid doses still result from nuclear medicine thyroid scans (130 mGy), but high thyroid doses are also associated with chest/abdomen/pelvis CT scans (18 and 19 mGy for male and females, respectively). Thyroid doses from CT scans did not exhibit the same downward trend as observed for other examinations. The largest thyroid doses from conventional radiography came from cervical spine and skull examinations. Thyroid doses from mammography (which began in the 1960s) were generally a fraction of a mGy. The highest average doses to the thyroid from mammography were about 0.42 mGy, with modestly larger doses associated with imaging of breasts with large compressed thicknesses. Thyroid doses from dental radiographic procedures have decreased markedly throughout the decades, from an average of 390 mGy for a full-mouth series in the 1930s to an average of 0.31 mGy today. Upper GI series fluoroscopy examinations resulted in up to two orders of magnitude lower thyroid doses than the barium swallow. There are considerable uncertainties associated with the presented doses, particularly for characterizing exposures of individual identified patients. Nonetheless, the tabulations provide the only comprehensive report on the estimation of typical radiation doses to the thyroid gland from medical diagnostic procedures over eight decades (1930–2010). These data can serve as a resource for epidemiologic studies that evaluate the late health effects of radiation exposure associated with diagnostic radiologic examinations.

show abstract

Radiobiologic risk estimation from dental radiology

Cited by 65 publications

References 20 publications

Dosimetry of Three Cone Beam Computerized Tomography Scanners at Different Fields of View in Terms of Various Head and Neck Organs

Dosimetry of Three Cone Beam Computerized Tomography Scanners at Different Fields of View in Terms of Various Head and Neck Organs

Epidemiology and etiology of intracranial meningiomas: A review

Thyroid Radiation Dose to Patients from Diagnostic Radiology Procedures over Eight Decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About