Methodology for estimating the radiation risk of medical exposure during computed tomography considering the uncertainties of the risk model

«Radiation and Risk», 2023, vol. 32, No. 2, pp.47-55

DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2023-32-2-47-55


Kashcheev V.V. – Head of Lab., C. Sc., Biol.
Pryakhin E.A. – Researcher. Contacts: 4 Korolyov str., Obninsk, Kaluga region, Russia, 249035. Tel.: (484) 399-32-81; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Menyajlo A.N. – Lead. Researcher, C. Sc., Biol. A. Tsyb MRRC.
A. Tsyb MRRC, Obninsk


The paper presents analysis of different factors affecting the uncertainty model for estimating radiation risk from computed tomography (CT). Uncertainties in radiation doses estimates caused by measurement (instrumental) errors or used dose estimation methods, the size of the scanned area and the type of CT scanner. The uncertainty of radiation dose due to measurement errors or dose estimation methods, the size of the scanned area and type of a CT scan may cause the uncertainties as well. Data used for calculating equivalent doses in individual organs and tissues and for calculating lifetime radiation risk of cancer development due to routine CT testing were updated. Conversion factors for DLP, a measure of radiation dose a patient received during CT exams of thoracic, abdo-men and head organs, were determined and used for conversion of the CT doses to equivalent doses for individual organs and tissues exposed to radiation. Data for 15 state-of-the-art CT scanners with varying scanning geometry were updated. Uncertainties in lifetime radiation risk were determined by estimating 95% confidence intervals for mean dose-proportionality ratios. Standard deviations related to specific dose distribution, scanning geometry and other factors that impact on uncertainty of radiation risk estimates were calculated. The standard deviations associated with the specifics of the dose distribution, scanning geometry and other factors affecting the uncertainties of radiation risk assessments were calculated. In the course of simulation modelling, organs and tissues were identified that are most exposed to radiation during CT of the chest, abdomen and head.

Key words
radiation risk, medical exposure, computed tomography, equivalent dose, DLP, effective dose, conversion factors, uncertainties in risk estimates, simulation modelling, standard deviation.


1. Kashcheev V.V., Pryakhin E.A. Medical diagnostic imaging: radiation safety issues. Review. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2018, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 49-64. (In Russian).

2. The radiation doses to the Russian population in 2016: information collection. St. Petersburg, Ramzaev’s NIIRG Publ., 2017. 125 p. (In Russian).

3. ICRP, 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP, 2007, vol. 37, no. 2-4, pp. 1-332.

4. The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT. Report of AAPM Task Group 23: CT dosimetry. College Park, MD, AAPM, 2008, pp. 6-11.

5. McCollough C.H., Leng S., Yu L., Cody D.D., Boone J.M., McNitt-Gray M.F. CT dose index and patient dose: they are not the same thing. Radiology, 2011, vol. 259, no. 2, pp. 311-316.

6. Shrimpton P.C., Hillier M.C., Lewis M.A., Dunn M. Doses from computed tomography (CT). Examinations in the UK – 2003 Review. Report NRPB-W67. Chilton, UK, NRPB, 2005.

7. Groves A.M., Owen K.E., Courtney H.M., Yates S.J., Goldstone K.E., Blake G.M., Dixon A.K. 16-detector multislice CT: dosimetry estimation by TLD measurement compared with Monte Carlo simulation. Br. J. Radiol., 2004, vol. 77, no. 920, pp. 662-665.

8. ICRP, 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ann. ICRP, 1991, vol. 21, no. 1-3, pp. 1-211.

9. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Report EUR 16262. Luxemburg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1999.

10. Comprehensive methodology for the evaluation of radiation dose in X-ray computed tomography. Report of AAPM Task Group 111. College Park, MD, AAPM, 2010, pp. 11-17.

11. Kashcheev V.V., Pryakhin E.A., Menyaylo A.N., Chekin S.Yu., Ivanov V.K. Calculation of equivalent doses to organs and tissues, as well as lifetime attributable risk from typical computed tomography imaging. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2013, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 8-20. (In Russian).

12. Ivanov V.K., Kashcheev V.V., Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Pryakhin E.A., Tsyb A.F., Mettler F.A. Estimating personal radiation risks attributed to multiple computed tomography scanning. ANRI, 2014, no. 1, pp. 65-77. (In Russian).

13. Stamm G., Nagel H.D. CT-expo: a novel program for dose evaluation in CT. Rofo, 2002, vol. 174, no. 12, pp. 1570-1576.

14. Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F., Mettler F.A., Menyaylo A.N., Kashcheev V.V. Methodology for estimating cancer risks of diagnostic medical exposure: with an example of the risks associated with computed tomography. Health Phys., 2012, vol. 103, no. 6, pp. 732-739.

15. Ivanov V.K., Kashcheev V.V., Chekin S.Yu., Menyaylo A.N., Pryakhin E.A., Tsyb A.F., Mettler F.A. Estimation of risk from medical radiation exposure based on effective and organ dose: how much difference is there? Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 2013, vol. 155, no. 3, pp. 317-328.

Full-text article (in Russian)