Factors associated with CT Scan repetition among paediatrics and its association with cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis study
Author Block: T. Alshangeeti1, R. Ahmad1, P. D. M. Abdullah Alshawsh1, M. Elzaki2; 1Kuala Lumpur/MY, 2Madinah/SA
Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate and quantify the risk of cancer in paediatric patients due to exposure to CT scans, including single and repeated exposure. To identify the types of cancer associated with radiation from CT and investigate the repeat rate, cumulative radiation doses, and reasons behind multiple exposures in paediatric populations.
Methods or Background: A review of pediatric patients' CT scan repetition found factors contributing to it and its link to cancer risk. The study, which included 33 studies through Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, had fivestudies with over 7 million participants in the meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess potential bias. The study offers a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence regarding exposure and outcome.
Results or Findings: A meta-analysis found an increased risk of overall cancer and brain tumours for children who underwent CT scans. The risk of brain tumours increased by 53% and the evidence for an increased risk of leukaemia was less conclusive. A dose-response effect was observed, with patients receiving two or more repeat CT scans showing a markedly elevated risk compared to those who had only one scan. Many patients undergo repeat scans for injury reassessment rather than a change in their clinical condition, particularly in head injuries. A study found a disparity in radiation exposure levels and the lack of implementation of CT dose optimization strategies in hospitals, resulting in unnecessarily high radiation doses.
Conclusion: CT scan exposure poses a significant risk of cancer, especially brain tumours. Repeat scans may increase the risk of leukaemia.
Limitations: The heterogeneity in the selection of variables used to assess cancer risk and the lack of clear explanations for why CT scans were repeated in the articles were identified.
Funding for this study: No funding was obtained for this study.
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information: We registered the protocol of this systematic review in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database, which can be accessed at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, and it is identified with the record number CRD42022342579