E-Mail Alert

Add your e-mail address to receive forthcoming issues of this journal:

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Special Issue "Public Health: How Safe Is Cardiac Imaging?"

Quicklinks

A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2009)

Special Issue Editors

Guest Editor
Dr. Eugenio Picano (Website)

Institute of Clinical Physiology, Via Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy
Phone: 39 50 3152398
Interests: acute and long-term effects of ionizing radiation in diagnostic and therapeutic cardiology procedures; health technology assessment; biological and economic sustainability of medical imaging
Guest Editor
Dr. Maria Grazia Andreassi

CNR, Institute of Clinical Physiology, Via Aurelia Sud, Massa, Italy

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Medical radiation imaging is the major source of man-made irradiation in western countries. About 5 billion imaging examinations are performed worldwide each year, and cardiac imaging represent >50% of all ionizing radiation examinations, accounting for about two thirds of the total effective dose to patients Individual lifetime patient exposures may well reach values around a cumulative exposure of 100 mSv, corresponding to 5,000 chest x-rays by the execution—one after the other — of a Multislice Computed Tomography (MSCT) (15 mSv), a Thallium scan (20–25 mSv), a coronary angiography (6 mSv), a coronary stenting (15 mSv), a follow-up repeat MSCT (again 15 mSv) and Thallium scan (again 20–25 mSv). Unfortunately, physicians show little awareness of the dose of the exam they daily perform or request. The current status of this field of evidence is the subjects of this special issue. In particular, it will comprise manuscripts providing information on population impact, professional and patient exposure from radiation dose in cardiac imaging. In addition, the issue will include also a paper describing the findings of recent studies regarding the use of surrogate biomarker of susceptibility in the assessing long-term risk of heath effects, and the future perspectives of the molecular epidemiology. Based on these contributions, the issue will try to compose a balanced issue in order to increase awareness and knowledge about radiation exposure from cardiac imaging and implications for health risk.

Dr. Eugenio Picano
Dr. Maria Grazia Andreassi
Guest Editors

Keywords

  • Cardiac Imaging
  • Low-dose radiation
  • Interventional Cardiology
  • Computed Tomography
  • Health Risk

Published Papers (3 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-3
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Open AccessArticle Health Risk and Biological Effects of Cardiac Ionising Imaging: From Epidemiology to Genes
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6(6), 1882-1893; doi:10.3390/ijerph6061882
Received: 21 April 2009 / Accepted: 17 June 2009 / Published: 19 June 2009
Cited by 5 | PDF Full-text (483 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Cardiac diagnostic or therapeutic testing is an essential tool for diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease, but it also involves considerable exposure to ionizing radiation. Every exposure produces a corresponding increase in cancer risk, and risks are highest for radiation exposure during [...] Read more.
Cardiac diagnostic or therapeutic testing is an essential tool for diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease, but it also involves considerable exposure to ionizing radiation. Every exposure produces a corresponding increase in cancer risk, and risks are highest for radiation exposure during infancy and adolescence. Recent studies on chromosomal biomarkers corroborate the current radioprotection assumption showing that even modest radiation load due to cardiac catheter-based fluoroscopic procedures can damage the DNA of the cell. In this article, we review the biological and clinical risks of cardiac imaging employing ionizing radiation. We also discuss the perspectives offered by the use of molecular biomarkers in order to better assess the long-term development of health effects. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Public Health: How Safe Is Cardiac Imaging?)
Open AccessArticle The Risks of Inappropriateness in Cardiac Imaging
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6(5), 1649-1664; doi:10.3390/ijerph6051649
Received: 20 April 2009 / Accepted: 12 May 2009 / Published: 14 May 2009
Cited by 10 | PDF Full-text (693 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The immense clinical and scientific benefits of cardiovascular imaging are well-established, but are also true that 30 to 50% of all examinations are partially or totally inappropriate. Marketing messages, high patient demand and defensive medicine, lead to the vicious circle of the [...] Read more.
The immense clinical and scientific benefits of cardiovascular imaging are well-established, but are also true that 30 to 50% of all examinations are partially or totally inappropriate. Marketing messages, high patient demand and defensive medicine, lead to the vicious circle of the so-called Ulysses syndrome. Mr. Ulysses, a typical middle-aged “worried-well” asymptomatic subject with an A-type coronary personality, a heavy (opium) smoker, leading a stressful life, would be advised to have a cardiological check-up after 10 years of war. After a long journey across imaging laboratories, he will have stress echo, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy, PET-CT, 64-slice CT, and adenosine-MRI performed, with a cumulative cost of >100 times a simple exercise-electrocardiography test and a cumulative radiation dose of >4,000 chest x-rays, with a cancer risk of 1 in 100. Ulysses is tired of useless examinations, exorbitant costs. unaffordable even by the richest society, and unacceptable risks. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Public Health: How Safe Is Cardiac Imaging?)

Review

Jump to: Research

Open AccessReview Biological Effects and Safety in Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Review
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6(6), 1778-1798; doi:10.3390/ijerph6061778
Received: 4 May 2009 / Accepted: 5 June 2009 / Published: 10 June 2009
Cited by 50 | PDF Full-text (331 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Since the introduction of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as a diagnostic technique, the number of people exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has increased dramatically. In this review, based on the results of a pioneer study showing in vitro and in vivo genotoxic [...] Read more.
Since the introduction of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as a diagnostic technique, the number of people exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMF) has increased dramatically. In this review, based on the results of a pioneer study showing in vitro and in vivo genotoxic effects of MRI scans, we report an updated survey about the effects of non-ionizing EMF employed in MRI, relevant for patients’ and workers’ safety. While the whole data does not confirm a risk hypothesis, it suggests a need for further studies and prudent use in order to avoid unnecessary examinations, according to the precautionary principle. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Public Health: How Safe Is Cardiac Imaging?)
Figures

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
IJERPH Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
ijerph@mdpi.com
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to IJERPH
Back to Top