Cargando…
Radiation exposure in acute myeloid leukaemia, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and multiple myeloma patients in the first year following diagnosis
PURPOSE: Radiological examinations are critical in the evaluation of patients with haematological malignancies for diagnosis and treatment. Any dose of radiation has been shown in studies to be harmful. In this regard, we assessed the radiation exposure of 3 types of haematological malignancies (dif...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Termedia Publishing House
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9995242/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36910883 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/pjr.2023.125008 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Radiological examinations are critical in the evaluation of patients with haematological malignancies for diagnosis and treatment. Any dose of radiation has been shown in studies to be harmful. In this regard, we assessed the radiation exposure of 3 types of haematological malignancies (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL], acute myeloid leukaemia [AML], and multiple myeloma [MM]) in our centre during the first year after diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In the first year after diagnosis we retrospectively reviewed the radiation exposure data of 3 types of haematological malignancies (DLBCL, AML, and MM). The total and median CED value (cumulative effective radiation dose in millisieverts [mSv]) of each patient was used. Each patient’s total and median estimated CED value was calculated using a web-based calculator and recorded in millisieverts (mSv). RESULTS: The total radiation doses in one year after diagnosis (CED value) were 46.54 ± 37.12 (median dose: 36.2) in the AML group; 63.00 ± 42.05 (median dose: 66.4) in the DLBCL group; and 28.04 ± 19.81 (median dose: 26.0) in the MM group (p = 0.0001). There was a significant difference between DLBCL and MM groups. CONCLUSIONS: In all 3 haematological malignancies, the radiation exposure was significant, especially in the DBLCL group, within the first year of diagnosis. It is critical to seek methods to reduce these dosage levels. In diagnostic radiology, reference values must be established to increase awareness and self-control and reduce patient radiation exposure. This paper is also the first to offer thorough details on the subject at hand, and we think it can serve as a guide for further investigation. |
---|