To study the effects of diagnostic radiation on human peripheral blood lymphocytes

Abstract

Diagnostic procedures utilizing ionizing radiation are in current frequent use since they are newlineessential for better diagnosis and treatment of disease. It is presumed that such modalities pose newlineminimal risk to patients and have a larger benefit to risk ratio. However concern arises when newlinethe radiation exposures are done without explainable clinical rationale and when the alternative newlinesafer modalities are available, and also when they are done repetitively. There exist lacunae in newlineknowledge and inadequate awareness about toxicity at low doses of radiation, its radiobiology newlineand detection of impact on the body. There are a lot of research reports on reoccurrence of newlinetumours in treated cancer patients due to secondary effects of high intensity radiation newlinetreatment (Girst et. al. 2015; Vikram et. al. 2009; Williston et. al. 2001; Johannasen et. newlineal. 2003; Coleman et. al. 2003; Rose-Ped et. al. 2002). There are reports which highlight newlinethe concern of using repeated diagnostic scans on patients at different age groups and relating newlineit to the probable outcome in future (Linet et al. 2012). The genomic instability newlineaccumulation is well-known cause for cancer in such cases. The diagnostic radiations newlineuse relatively low doses of radiations compared to radiotherapy. There is limited data newlineavailable on occurrence of genomic instability/tumors in patients undergoing scanning newlinethrough low dose radiological diagnostic techniques like CT Scanning, X-ray, newlinemammography and angiography (Linet et. al. 2012; Miglioretti et. al. 2016; Nyugen newlineet. al. 2015). Possibility of genotoxicity increases with increasing number of scanning newlineprocedures as these may accumulate with time. newlineThe International Commission of Radiological Protection (ICRP) has declared that no radiation, newlineeven in the minute quantity can be regarded as absolutely safe (ICRP Publication No. 103). newline newline