Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 14, Issue 10, pp 1529–1535

Radiation Dose from Computed Tomography in Patients with Necrotizing Pancreatitis: How Much Is Too Much?

  • Chad G. Ball
  • Camilo Correa-Gallego
  • Thomas J. Howard
  • Nicholas J. Zyromski
  • Michael G. House
  • Henry A. Pitt
  • Atilla Nakeeb
  • Christian M. Schmidt
  • Fatih Akisik
  • Keith D. Lillemoe
2010 SSAT Plenary Presentation

Abstract

Objectives

Low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging has been indirectly linked with subsequent cancer. Computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for defining pancreatic necrosis. The primary goal was to identify the frequency and effective radiation dose of CT imaging for patients with necrotizing pancreatitis.

Methods

All patients with necrotizing pancreatitis (2003–2007) were retrospectively analyzed for CT-related radiation exposure.

Results

Necrosis was identified in 18% (238/1290) of patients with acute pancreatitis (mean age = 53 years; hospital/ICU length of stay = 23/7 days; mortality = 9%). A median of five CTs/patient [interquartile range (IQR) = 4] were performed during a median 2.6-month interval. The average effective dose was 40 mSv per patient (equivalent to 2,000 chest X-rays; 13.2 years of background radiation; one out of 250 increased risk of fatal cancer). The actual effective dose was 63 mSv considering various scanner technologies. CTs were infrequently (20%) followed by direct intervention (199 interventional radiology, 118 operative, 12 endoscopic) (median = 1; IQR = 2). Magnetic resonance imaging did not have a CT-sparing effect. Mean direct hospital costs increased linearly with CT number (R = 0.7).

Conclusions

The effective radiation dose received by patients with necrotizing pancreatitis is significant. Management changes infrequently follow CT imaging. The ubiquitous use of CT in necrotizing pancreatitis raises substantial public health concerns and mandates a careful reassessment of its utility.

Keywords

Necrotizing pancreatitis Radiation Computed tomography 

References

  1. 1.
    Neoptolemos JP, Raraty M, Finch M, Sutton R. Acute pancreatitis: the substantial human and financial costs. Gut 1998;42:886–891.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Uhl W, Warshaw A, Imrie C, Bassi C, McKay CJ, Lankisch PG, Carter R, Di Magno E, Banks PA, Whitcomb DC, Dervenis C, Ulrich CD, Satake K, Ghaneh P, Hartwig W, Werner J, McEntee G, Neoptolemos JP, Buchler MW. IAP guidelines for the surgical management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2002;2:565–573.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frey CF, Zhou H, Harvey DJ, White RH. The incidence and case-fatality rates of acute biliary, alcoholic, and idiopathic pancreatitis in California, 1994–2001. Pancreas 2006;33:336–344.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bradley EL 3rd, Howard TJ, van Sonnenberg E, Fotoohi M. Intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis: an evidence-based review of surgical and percutaneous alternatives. J Gastrointest Surg 2008;12:634–639.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Howard TJ, Patel JB, Zyromski NJ, Sandrasegaran K, Yu J, Nakeeb A, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD. Declining morbidity and mortality rates in the surgical management of pancreatic necrosis. J Gastrointest Surg 2007;11:43–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parikh PY, Pitt HA, Kilbane M, Howard TJ, Nakeeb A, Schmidt CM, Lillemoe KD, Zyromski NJ. Pancreatic necrosectomy: North American mortality is much lower than expected. J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:712–719.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bradley EL 3rd. A clinically based classification system for acute pancreatitis. Summary of the International Symposium on Acute Pancreatitis, Atlanta, GA, September 11–13, 1992. Arch Surg 1993;128:586–590.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karimgani I, Porter KA, Langevin RE, Banks PA. Prognostic factors in sterile pancreatic necrosis. Gastroenterology 1992;103:1636–1640.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Charbonney E, Nathens AB. Severe acute pancreatitis: A review. Surg Infect 2008;9:573–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Balthazar EJ, Ranson JH, Naidich DP, Megibow AJ, Caccavale R, Cooper MM. Acute pancreatitis: Prognostic value of CT. Radiology 1985;156:767–772.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Waele JJ, Delrue L, Hoste EA, De Vos M, Duyck P, Colardyn FA. Extrapancreatic inflammation on abdominal computed tomography as an early predictor of disease severity in acute pancreatitis: evaluation of a new scoring system. Pancreas 2007;34:185–190.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hui CM, MacGregor JH, Tien HC, Kortbeek JB. Radiation dose from initial trauma assessment and resuscitation: review of the literature. Can J Surg 2009;52:147–152.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, Shah ND, Nasir K, Einstein AJ, Nallamothu BK. Exposure from low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. NEJM 2009;361:849–857.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—An increasing source of radiation exposure. NEJM 2009;357:2277–2284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brix G, Nissen-Meyer S, Lechel U, Nissen-Meyer J, Griebel J, Nekolaa AE, Becker C, Reiser M. Radiation exposures of cancer patients from medical x-rays: How relevant are they for individual patients and population exposure? Eur J Rad 2009; 72(2):342–347Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sources and effects of ionizing radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the effects of atomic radiation: UNESCEAR 2000 report to the General Assembly. New York: United Nations, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    IMV 2006 CT Market Summary Report. Des Plains, IL: IMV Medical Information Division, 2006.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Amis Jr ES, Butler PF, Applegate KE, Birnbaum SB, Brateman LF, Hevezi JM, Mettler FA, Morin RL, Pentecost MJ, Smith GC, Strauss KJ, Zeman RK. American College of Radiology. American College of Radiology White paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4:272–284.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nekolla E, Veit R, Griebel J, Brix G. Frequency and effective dose of diagnostic x-ray procedures in Germany. Biomed Tech 2005;5-:1334–1335.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mettler FA. Huda W, Yoshizumi TT, Mahesh M. Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: A catalog. Radiology 2008;248:254–263.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nishizawa K, Matsumoto M, Iwai K, Maruyama T. Survey of CT practice in Japan and collective effective dose estimation. Nippon Acta Radiol 2004;64:151–158.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Goldacer MJ, Roberts SE. Hospital admission for acute pancreatitis in an English population, 1963–98: database study of incidence and mortality. BMJ 2004;328:1466–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eland IA, Sturkenboom MJ, Wilson JH, Sticker BH. Incidence and mortality of acute pancreatitis between 1985 and 1995. Scand J Gastroenterol 2000;35:1110–1116.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Floyd A, Pederson L, Nielsen GL, Thorladcius-Ussing O, Sorensen HT. Secular trends in incidence and 30-day case fatality of acute pancreatitis in North Jutland County, Denmark: a register-based study from 1981–2000. Scand J Gastroeterol 2002;37:1461–1465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Appelros S, Borgstrom A. Incidence, etiology and mortality rate of acute pancreatitis over 10 years in a defined urban population in Sweden. Br J Surg 1999;86:465–470.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academic Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ambrose J, Hounsfield G. Computerized transverse axial tomography. Br J Radiol 1973;46:148–149.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Frush DP. Review of radiation issues for computed tomography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2004;25:17–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mayo JR, Aldrich J, Muller NL. Radiation exposure at chest CT: a statement of the Fleischner Society. Radiology 2003;228:15–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hamilton DR, Murray JD, Ball CG. Cardiac health for astronauts: coronary calcification scores and CRP as criteria for selection and retention. Aviat Space Environ Med 2006;77:377–387.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ball CG, Kirkpatrick AW, Feliciano DV. Can J Surg. The occult pneumothorax: what have we learned? Can J Surg 2009;52:E173–E179.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Heiken JP, Peterson CM, Menias CO. Virtual colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening: current status. Cancer Imaging 2005;5:S133–S139.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brenner DJ, Georgsson MA. Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? Gastroenterology 2005;129:328–337.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Henschke CL, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Miettinen OS. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. NEJM 2006;355:1763–1771.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bach PB, Jett JR, Pastorino U, Tockman MS, Swensen SJ, Begg CB. Computed tomography screening and lung cancer outcomes. JAMA 2007;297:953–961.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Einstein AJ, Henzlova MJ, Rajagopalan S. Estimating risk of cancer associates with radiation exposure from 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography. JAMA 2007;18:317–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brenner DJ, Elliston CD. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. Radiology 2004;232:735–738.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Beinfeld MT, Wittenberg E, Gazella GS. Cost-effectiveness of whole-body CT screening. Radiology 2005;234: 415–422.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    UNSCEAR 2000. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the effects of atomic radiation. Health Phys 2000;79:314.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kim PK, Gracias VH, Maidment AD, O’Shea M, Reilly PM, Schwab CW. Cumulative radiation dose caused by radiologic studies in critically ill trauma patients. J Trauma 2004;57:510–514.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    What’s NEXT? Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends: 2000 computed tomography. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Department of Health and Human Services. 2006. http://www.crcpd.org/Pubs/NexTrifolds/NEXT2000CT_T.pdf. Accessed on November 2, 2009.
  42. 42.
    Ron E. Ionizing radiation and cancer risk: evidence from epidemiology. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:232–237.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tubiana M. Computed tomography and radiation exposure. NEJM 2009;358:850–853.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Breckow J. Linear-no-threshold is a radiation-protection standard rather than a mechanistic effect model. Radiat Environ Biophys 2006;44:257–260.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Masse R. The debate on the use of linear no threshold for assessing the effects of low doses. J Radiol Prot 2006;26:317–324.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Masse R. Low-dose risk assessment: comments on the summary of the International Workshop. Radiat Res 2007;167:742–744.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Giles J. Study warns of ‘avoidable’ risks of CT scans. Nature 2004;431:391.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Casarett G, Bair WJ, Meinhold CB. NCRP Report No. 91. Recommendations on limited exposure to ionizing radiation. Bethesda (MD) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 1980; p. 3–10.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    International Commission on Radiation Protection. Development of the Draft 2005 recommendations of the ICRP: a collection of papers. A report of ICRP supporting guidance 4. Ann ICRP 2004;34 Suppl:1–44.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    American College of Surgeons: Committee on Trauma. National Trauma Data Bank 2009 Annual Report. http://www.facs.org/trauma/ntdb/ntdbannualreport2009.pdf. Accessed on November 17, 2009.
  51. 51.
    Garfinkel L. Probability of developing or dying of cancer. United States, 1991. Sta Bull Metrop Insur Co 1995;76:1–201.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Slovis T. CT and computed radiography: the pictures are great, but is the radiation dose greater than required? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:39–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tien HC, Tremblay LN, Rizoli SB, Gelberg J, Spencer F, Caldwell C, Brenneman FD. Radiation exposure from diagnostic imaging in severely injured trauma patients. J Trauma 2007;176:289–296.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Strate T, Yekebas E, Knoefel WT, Bloechle C, Izbicki JR. Pathogenesis and the natural course of chronic pancreatitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2002;14:929–934.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yamada Y, Mori H, Matsumoto S, Kiyosue H, Hori Y, Hongo N. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma versus pancreatitis: differentiation with triple-phase helical CT. Abdom Imaging 2010. 35(2):163–171.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Morgan DE, Ragheb CM, Lockhart ME, Cary B, Fineberg NS, Berland LL. Acute pancreatitis: Computed tomography utilization and radiation exposure are related to severity but not patient age. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:303–308.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulation (10 CFR), subpart B. Washington, DC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part02/part020-1101.html. Accessed on November 2, 2009.
  58. 58.
    Prasad KN, Cole WC, Haase GM. Radiation protection in humans: extending the concept of low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) from dose to biological damage. Br J Radiol 2003;327:371–372.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Plurad D, Green D, Demetriades D, Rhee P. The increasing use of chest computed tomography for trauma: is it being overutilized? J Trauma 2007;62:631–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risk. Radiology 2004; 231:393–398.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Goske MJ, Applegate KE, Boylan J, Butler PR, Callahan MJ, Coley BD, Farley S, Frush DP, Hernanz-Schulman M, Jaramillo D, Johnson ND, Kaste SC, Morrison G, Strauss KJ. Image Gently(SM): a national education and communication campaign in radiology using the science of social marketing. J Am Coll Radiol 2008;5:1200–1205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gerber TC, Carr JJ, Arai AE, Dixon RL, Ferrari VA, Gomes AS, Heller GV, McCollough CH, McNitt-Gray MF, Mettler FA, Mieres JH, Morin RL, Yester MV. Ionizing radiation in cardiac imaging: a science advisory from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention 2009;119:1056–1065.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    McCollough CH. CT dose: How to measure, how to reduce. Health Phys 2008;95:508–517.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Lee CH, Goo JM, Ye HJ, Ye SJ, Park CM, Chun EJ, Im JG. Radiation dose modulation techniques in the multidetector CT era: from basics to practice. Radiographics 2008;28:1451–1459.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chad G. Ball
    • 1
  • Camilo Correa-Gallego
    • 1
  • Thomas J. Howard
    • 1
  • Nicholas J. Zyromski
    • 1
  • Michael G. House
    • 1
  • Henry A. Pitt
    • 1
  • Atilla Nakeeb
    • 1
  • Christian M. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Fatih Akisik
    • 2
  • Keith D. Lillemoe
    • 1
  1. 1.Departments of SurgeryIndiana UniversityIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Departments of RadiologyIndiana UniversityIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations