Ionizing Radiation Protection Principles in Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry- A Review Study

Document Type : Review Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, or DXA, has become the gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis and other bone-related diseases due to its ability to show changes in bone density. This article discusses the importance of following ionizing radiation safety principles during DXA scanning for various groups, including patients, radiographers, children, pregnant women, and fetuses.
Methods: Due to the limited number of published articles, data with no time limit until 2024 were collected using the ISI Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases.
Findings: The effective dose for pencil beam DXA devices is less than 1 μSv. However, doses from fan beam devices can reach up to 15 μSv, depending on the device's model and manufacturer. For medical exposures, there is no restriction on the number of scans. The use of a standard DXA clinical technique developed for adults leads to excessive radiation exposure in the use of DXA for children and adolescents.
Conclusion: Radiation doses in DXA are very low compared to other medical imaging methods. However, ionizing radiation carries potential risks, and special attention should be paid to its justification and optimization, considering all radiation protection measures for patients, radiographers, children, pregnant women, and fetuses.

Highlights

Mahdi Asgari: Google Scholar

Mohammad Reza Salamat: Google Scholar

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Shevroja E, Reginster J-Y, Lamy O, Al-Daghri N, Chandran M, Demoux-Baiada A-L, et al. Update on the clinical use of trabecular bone score (TBS) in the management of osteoporosis: results of an expert group meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO), and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) under the auspices of WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Health and Aging. Osteoporos Int 2023; 34(9): 1501-29.
  2. Janghorbani M, Salamat M. Does the impact of obesity on bone density differ in men and women? Osteoporosis International 2016; 27: S736-S.
  3. Davidsson L. Dual energy X ray absorptiometry for bone mineral density and body composition assessment. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2010.
  4. Yaghoobi MM, Gholami AS. Association of rs4516035 Polymorphism with Osteoporosis in the Southeastern Iranian Population: A Case-Control Study. J Res Health Sci 2024; 24(1): e00603.
  5. El Maghraoui A. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Norderstedt, Germany: BoD–Books on Demand; 2012.
  6. Ghalenavi E, Mirfeizi Z, Hashemzadeh K, Sahebari M, Joker MH. Diagnostic value of radiographic singh index compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan in diagnosing osteoporosis: a systematic review. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2024; 12(1): 1-11.
  7. Guyan F, Gianduzzo E, Waltenspül M, Dietrich M, Kabelitz M. Cortical thickness index and canal calcar ratio: a comparison of proximal femoral fractures and non-fractured femora in octogenarians to centenarians. J Clin Med 2024; 13(4): 981.
  8. Gonera-Furman A, Bolanowski M, Jędrzejuk D. Osteosarcopenia—the role of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in diagnostics. J Clin Med 2022; 11(9): 2522.
  9. Salamat MR, Shanei A, Khoshhali M, Salamat AH, Siavash M, Asgari M. Use of conventional regional DXA scans for estimating whole body composition. Arch Iran Med 2014; 17(10):674-8.
  10. Libouban H, Simon Y, Silve C, Legrand E, Baslé MF, Audran M, et al. Comparison of pencil-, fan-, and cone-beam dual X-ray absorptiometers for evaluation of bone mineral content in excised rat bone. J Clin Densitom 2002; 5(4): 355-61.
  11. Salamat MR, Shanei A, Asgari M, Salamat A, Khoshhali M. Using anthropometric indices predictive equations for estimating whole-body fat mass instead of whole body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan [in Isfahan]. J Isfahan Med Sch 2014; 32(292): 1046-53.
  12. Krueger D, Tanner SB, Szalat A, Malabanan A, Prout T, Lau A, et al. DXA reporting updates: 2023 Official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry. J Clin Densitom 2023: 27(1): 101437.
  13. Shanei A, Siavash M, Shakeri Z, Salamat Study of bone mineral density changes in osteoporosis therapy. Advances in Nanobiotechnology 2018; 1(1): 16-20.
  14. Unscear S. Effects of Ionizing Radiation. United Nations, New York: 2000. 453-87.
  15. Stuursma A, Stroot IA, Vermeulen KM, Slart RH, Greuter MJ, Mourits MJ, et al. Reliability, costs, and radiation dose of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in diagnosis of radiologic sarcopenia in surgically menopausal women. Insights Imaging 2024; 15(1): 104.
  16. Damilakis J, Adams JE, Guglielmi G, Link Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 2707-14.
  17. Solomou G, Damilakis J. Radiation exposure in bone densitometry. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2016; 20(4): 392-8.
  18. Söderholm S. Evaluation of the DXA radiation environment at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. [Online 2022]. Available from: https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/71702
  19. Njeh C, Apple K, Temperton D, Boivin C. Radiological assessment of a new bone densitometer—the Lunar EXPERT. Br J Radiol 1996; 69(820): 335-40.
  20. Blake GM, Naeem M, Boutros M. Comparison of effective dose to children and adults from dual X-ray absorptiometry examinations. Bone 2006; 38(6): 935-42.
  21. Salamat MR, Shanei A, Salamat AH, Khoshhali M, Asgari M. Anthropometric predictive equations for estimating body composition. Adv Biomed Res 2015; 4(1): 34.
  22. Thomas SR, Kalkwarf HJ, Buckley DD, Heubi JE. Effective dose of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans in children as a function of age. J Clin Densitom 2005; 8(4): 415-22.
  23. Steel S, Baker A, Saunderson J. An assessment of the radiation dose to patients and staff from a Lunar Expert-XL fan beam densitometer. Physiol Meas 1998;19(1): 17-26.
  24. Lewis MK, Blake GM, Fogelman I. Patient dose in dual x-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporos Int 1994; 4(1): 11-5.
  25. Boudousq V, Kotzki PO, Dinten J, Barrau C, Robert-Coutant C, Thomas E, et al. Total dose incurred by patients and staff from BMD measurement using a new 2D digital bone densitometer. Osteoporos Int 2003; 14(3): 263-9.
  26. Oatway W, Jones A, Holmes S. Ionising radiation exposure of the UK population, 2010 review: Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Public Health England; [13 April 2016]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ionising-radiation-exposure-of-the-uk-population-2010-review
  27. Lochard J, Bartlett DT, Rühm W, Yasuda H, Bottollier-Depois JF, Authors on behalf of ICRP. Radiological protection from cosmic radiation in aviation. ICRP Publication 132. Ann ICRP 2016; 45(1): 5-48.
  28. Wall B, Haylock R, Jansen J, Hillier M, Hart D, Shrimpton P. Radiation risks from medical X-ray examinations as a function of the age and sex of the patient: Health Protection Agency Didcot; 2011.
  29. Larkin A, Sheahan N, O'connor U, Gray L, Dowling A, Vano E, et al. QA/acceptance testing of DEXA X-ray systems used in bone mineral densitometry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008; 129(1-3): 279-83.
  30. Salamat MR, Tvakoli MB, Abedi I. The absorbed dose by postmenopausal women using bone mineral densitometry in dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and its relationship with height, weight and body mass index [in Persian]. J Isfahan Med Sch 2012; 29(162): 1883-90.
  31. Shalof H, Dimitri P, Shuweihdi F, Offiah AC. Which skeletal imaging modality is best for assessing bone health in children and young adults compared to DXA? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Bone 2021; 150: 116013.
  32. Fatima N, Zaman S, Zaman A, Zaman U, Zaman A, uz Zaman M. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in pediatric population. PJR 2023; 33(1): 40-3.
  33. Salamat MR, Entezari R, Salamat A, Dashti G. Evaluating the effects of adolescence pregnancy on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women [in Persian]. J Isfahan Med Sch 2016; 34(392): 871-7.
  34. Valentin J. Pregnancy and medical radiation. Ann ICRP 2000; 30(1): iii-viii, 1-43.
  35. Damilakis J. Pregnancy and diagnostic X-rays. Eur Radiol Suppl 2004; 14: 33-9.
  36. Damilakis J, Perisinakis K, Vrahoriti H, Kontakis G, Varveris H, Gourtsoyiannis N. Embryo/fetus radiation dose and risk from dual X-ray absorptiometry examinations. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13(9): 716-22.
  37. Ann I. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Pregnancy and medical radiation: ICRP Publication. Ann ICRP 2000; 84(30): 1-43.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 42, Issue 784
4th Week, November
November and December 2024
Pages 839-849

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 13 July 2024
  • Revise Date: 25 August 2024
  • Accept Date: 03 September 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics