The biological effects of diagnostic cardiac imaging on chronically exposed physicians: the importance of being non-ionizing.
Ultrasounds and ionizing radiation are extensively used for diagnostic applications in the cardiology clinical practice. This paper reviewed the available information on occupational risk of the cardiologists who perform, every day, cardiac imaging procedures. At the moment, there are no consistent evidence that exposure to medical ultrasound is capable of inducing genetic effects, and representing a serious health hazard for clinical staff. In contrast, exposure to ionizing radiation may result in adverse health effect on clinical cardiologists. Although the current risk estimates are clouded by approximations and extrapolations, most data from cytogenetic studies have reported a detrimental effect on somatic DNA of professionally exposed personnel to chronic low doses of ionizing radiation. Since interventional cardiologists and electro-physiologists have the highest radiation exposure among health professionals, a major awareness is crucial for improving occupational protection. Furthermore, the use of a biological dosimeter could be a reliable tool for the risk quantification on an individual basis.
Andreassi
Maria Grazia
MG
Laboratory of Cellular Biology and Genetics, CNR Institute of Clinical Physiology, Pisa, Italy. andreas@ifc.cnr.it
D001822:Body Burden; D002309:Cardiology; D003952:Diagnostic Imaging / Q000009:adverse effects*; D006801:Humans; D016273:Occupational Exposure / Q000009:adverse effects*; D010820:Physicians; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011832:Radiation Injuries / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control; D011835:Radiation Protection / Q000379:methods*; D011839:Radiation, Ionizing; D011840:Radiation, Nonionizing; D012062:Relative Biological Effectiveness; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D012307:Risk Factors