Radiation Exposure from Pediatric CT Scans and Subsequent Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47489/szmc.v40i1.912Keywords:
Pediatric CT, Cancer Risk, Ionizing Radiation, Meta-analysis, PECO FrameworkAbstract
Background: Computed tomography (CT) is now the instrument that cannot be omitted in the diagnosis of pediatric medicine, as it is fast to acquire and has high diagnostic accuracy. But CT consists of exposure to ionizing radiation and children are especially prone to the dangers of its adverse effects due to the heightened tissue radiosensitivity, and extended lifespan. Increased epidemiological evidence has caused some concerns about the relationship between pediatric CT exposure and subsequent malignancy.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between radiation exposure from diagnostic CT scans in childhood and the subsequent risk of developing cancer.
Method: An extensive literature review was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library regarding studies published since January 2004 and January 2024. It was a PRISMA 2020 review with a structure built around the PECO framework, which encompasses children and adolescents (?18 years) who are exposed to CT imaging versus non-exposed groups. Only eligible studies were population-based cohort studies that provided quantitative estimates of cancer risks after exposure to CT. Random-effects meta-analysis model was applied to combine data on the basis of heterogeneity between-study. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to determine the risk of bias.
Results: The quantitative synthesis included twelve cohort studies that were included in the inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis revealed a statistically significant relationship between the exposure of pediatric CT and future cancer risk, with a total pooled relative risk (RR) of 1.28 (95% CI: 1.15- 1.42). There was moderate heterogeneity between studies (I 2 = 62%). Subgroup analyses indicated greater risk estimates of brain tumors (RR = 1.67; 95% CI: 1.30-2.15) and leukemia (RR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.21-1.95), especially after head CT examinations. The sensitivity analyses ensured that the results are sound after the exclusion of studies with moderate risk of bias.
Conclusion: Pediatric CT exposure has been linked with a modest increase in cancer risk that is long term. These findings emphasize the need to reduce radiation exposure, emphasize clinical reasoning, and optimize the use of CT in children despite the low absolute risk. Evidence-based imaging strategies should be implemented to address the issue of balance between diagnostic benefit and long-term damage.
References
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277–2284. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra072149
Pearce MS et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours. Lancet. 2012;380(9840):499–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0
Mathews JD et al. Cancer risk in 680,000 people exposed to CT scans in childhood. BMJ. 2013;346:f2360. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f2360
Miglioretti DL et al. Use of CT in pediatrics and associated radiation exposure and cancer risk. JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(8):700–707. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.311
Meulepas JM et al. Radiation exposure from pediatric CT scans and cancer risk in the Netherlands. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019;111(3):256–263. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy104
Journy N et al. Are studies on cancer risk from CT scans biased by indication? Br J Cancer. 2015;112(1):185–193. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.526
Bosch de Basea M et al. Risk of childhood leukaemia and brain tumours after CT exposure. Br J Cancer. 2018;118(9):1270–1276. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0025-4
Krille L et al. Cancer risk before age 15 after CT exposure. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2015;54(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00411-014-0580-3
Hauptmann M et al. Brain cancer after radiation exposure from CT examinations. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(11):1499–1508. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30463-2
Huang R et al. Pediatric CT exposure and cancer risk: meta-analysis. Dose Response. 2020;18(2):1559325820923828. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559325820923828
Little MP et al. Risks associated with low doses of ionizing radiation. Radiology. 2014;271(3):690–705. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131155
Tran TTT et al. Pediatric CT exposure and cancer incidence in South Korea. Eur Radiol. 2023;33(4):2551–2560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-09234-0
Ogbole GI et al. Pediatric CT radiation dose and cancer risk in a low-resource setting. West Afr J Radiol. 2018;25(1):21–27. https://doi.org/10.4103/wajr.wajr_15_17
UNSCEAR. Effects of ionizing radiation on children. United Nations; 2013. https://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2013.html
Page MJ et al. PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Page MJ et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160
Wells GA et al. Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2013. https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
Egger M et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
Fazel R et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(9):849–857. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0901249
American College of Radiology. Image Gently Campaign. Reston, VA; 2018. https://www.imagegently.org
This work is licensed under a 