Evaluation of X-ray doses and their corresponding biological effects on experimental animals in cone-beam micro-CT scans (R-mCT2).

Nobuyuki Miyahara, Toshiaki Kokubo, Yukihiro Hara, Ayuta Yamada, Takafumi Koike, Yoshinori Arai
Author Information
  1. Nobuyuki Miyahara: National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba, 263-8555, Japan. happynob@nirs.go.jp.
  2. Toshiaki Kokubo: National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba, 263-8555, Japan.
  3. Yukihiro Hara: Rigaku Co., 3-9-12 Matubara-cho, Akisima-Shi, Tokyo, 196-8666, Japan.
  4. Ayuta Yamada: Rigaku Co., 3-9-12 Matubara-cho, Akisima-Shi, Tokyo, 196-8666, Japan.
  5. Takafumi Koike: Rigaku Co., 3-9-12 Matubara-cho, Akisima-Shi, Tokyo, 196-8666, Japan.
  6. Yoshinori Arai: Nihon University School of Dentistry, 1-8-13 Surugadai Kanda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101-8310, Japan.

Abstract

Studies show that the radiation dose received during a micro-CT examination may have adverse effects on living subjects. However, the correlations between the biological effects and the radiation doses have never been thoroughly evaluated in the majority of cases. In this study, we evaluated the biological radiation effects of measured radiation doses in ICR mice using cone-beam micro-CT scans. Long-term in vivo whole-body micro-CT scans of ICR mice were performed for a duration of 4 weeks. Although a scanning frequency of three scans per week is higher than that necessary for conventional studies, this study represents particular cases where the subjects may undergo an extreme number of examinations. The average X-ray dose of a CT scan measures 16.19 mGy at the center of a phantom and 16.24 mGy at an offset position of 7.5 mm from the center of the phantom. The total average dose at the center of the phantom during the 4-week scanning period was 194.3 mGy. No significant radiation effects were observed in the weight gain curves, organ weights, blood analyses, litter sizes, reared offspring sizes, and the histopathologic results. Therefore, it is unlikely that the measured doses for the CT scans caused any radiation damage in the mice.

Keywords

References

  1. Mutat Res. 1976 Sep;36(3):363-78 [PMID: 958232]
  2. Med Phys. 2006 Jan;33(1):216-24 [PMID: 16485428]
  3. Invest Radiol. 2006 Apr;41(4):384-90 [PMID: 16523021]
  4. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44427 [PMID: 23028537]
  5. Radiology. 1974 Nov;113(2):435-40 [PMID: 4417427]
  6. Mol Imaging. 2004 Jan;3(1):55-62 [PMID: 15142412]
  7. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Feb;83(2):349-53 [PMID: 18167503]
  8. Lancet Oncol. 2003 Sep;4(9):529-36 [PMID: 12965273]
  9. Acta Radiol. 2011 Feb 1;52(1):75-80 [PMID: 21498330]
  10. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2009 Jan 01;14(5):1939-44 [PMID: 19273175]
  11. Neoplasia. 2004 Jul-Aug;6(4):374-9 [PMID: 15256059]
  12. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Jul;24(7):787-92 [PMID: 22458557]
  13. Arkh Patol. 1978;40(8):69-70 [PMID: 83134]
  14. J Radiat Res. 2000 Jun;41(2):129-37 [PMID: 11037580]
  15. Invest Radiol. 2005 May;40(5):263-9 [PMID: 15829823]
  16. Mutat Res. 1982 May;94(1):115-23 [PMID: 7099186]

MeSH Term

Animals
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Female
Male
Mice
Mice, Inbred ICR
Radiation Dosage
Whole Body Imaging
X-Ray Microtomography