Gender based lung cancer risks for symptomatic coronary artery disease patients undergone cardiac CT

3Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We estimate the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of lung cancer incidence in symptomatic Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) patients receiving enhanced Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) and the unenhanced Computed Tomography Calcium Scoring (CTCS) examination. Retrospective analysis has been made of CCTA and CTCS data collected for 87 confirmed CAD adult patients. Patient effective dose (E) and organ doses (ODs) were calculated using CT-EXPO. Statistical correlation and the differences between E and ODs in enhanced CCTA and unenhanced CTCS were calculated using the Pearson coefficient and Wilcoxon unpaired t-test. Following BEIR VII report guidance, organ-specific LARs for the cohort were estimated using the organ-equivalent dose-to-risk conversion factor for numbers of cases per 100,000 patients exposed to low doses of 0.1 Gy. Significant statistical difference (p<0.0001) is found between E obtained for CTCS and that of CCTA. The scan length was found to be greater in CCTA (17.5 ± 2.9 cm) compared to that for CTCS (15 ± 2 cm). More elevated values of dose were noted for the esophagus (4.2 ± 2.15 mSv) and thymus (9.6 ± 2.54 mSv) for both CTCS and CCTA. CTCS organ doses were lower than that of CCTA. Per 100,000 patients, female cumulative doses are seen to give rise to greater lung cancer LARs compared to that for males, albeit with risk varying significantly, noticeably greater for females, younger patients and combined CCTA and CTCS scans. While scan parameters and tube-modulation methods clearly contribute to patient dose, mAs offers by far the greater contribution.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dalah, E. Z., Obaideen, A., Anam, S., Alzimami, K., Jambi, L. K., & Bradley, D. A. (2022). Gender based lung cancer risks for symptomatic coronary artery disease patients undergone cardiac CT. PLoS ONE, 17(4 April). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265609

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free