64 slice CT scanner

[oceanreef203]

Recently my physician prescribed the less invasive CT scan for arterial clogs. I have had a angiogram 10 years ago and everything was clear, no blockages anywhere. Now, there is slight angina more often than it used to seem to occur, but when I excercise, nothing hurts, all is well. Blood tests are all OK, but the physician suggested the CT scan. My question: I thought I had read that the CT scan emits a terribly high dose of radiation, and the article actually suggested that unless you could not have the heart catheterization, that would be the only time a physician would recommend the CT scan. Is the CT scan safe after several years of trials? I don't mind the procedure, but I really don't need any heavy rad doses if there are alternatives. The only (last) angiogram was done through the wrist, not the thigh, and the doctor stated all looked clean.
Thanks for any help or responses about the rad doses...
Oceanreef203

[kenkeith]

With intervention procedure, ACC/AHA guidelines have cited a 1.7% risk of major complications from IA (interventioanl alternative), including a 0.11% risk of mortality and 0.43% of vascular complications. These attendant risks, as well as patient comfort and economic costs, generally has restricted the use of intervention to patients with higher pretest probability of disease, and led to the development of noninvasive cardiac imaging modalities.

The introduction of technology new scanners has made CT coronary angiography (CTCA) easier to perform and more accurate, leading to their wide popularity as a noninvasive alternative to AI (cath) procedure.

CT risks varied markedly depending on age, sex, and scan protocol The highest risks of individual cancers were lung cancer and, in women, breast cancer. Lung cancer surpassed breast cancer at age 32 as the leading risk to women.

Risks were nontrivial, and in a worst-case scenario approached 1% cancer risk from a single CTCA scan. Thankfully, the vast majority of patients who currently undergo 64-slice CTCA have risks considerably less than this.

Risks were highest for young women and lowest for older men.

Risk fell with increasing age, which is probably due to two factors: Decreasing radiosensitivity with age, meaning that the older we get, the less likely it is that the same amount of radiation will cause cancer; and  the lag time between radiation exposure and developing cancer is generally over a decade, and older patients are more likely to die of some other cause before developing a cancer attributable to the radiation.

The above considerations should be taken into account before there is a decision.  I had a CT scan 64-slice a couple of months ago.  The scan produces images of the complete anatomy of vessels and this includes the area between the inner and outer layer (intima) of the vessel where soft plaque can develop and rupture through into the blood flowing channel forming a clot and the risk of a heart attack.  The scan also includes images of the pulmonary system and aorta (ascending, arch, and descending).

[Encephalomalcia]

The CT scan emits lots of radiation.  I believe it is equal to hundreds of chest x-rays.  Have you had a lot of radiation in your lifetime already would be the question to answer.  If you have had a lot of radiation, you will need to think about any additional radiation.  I have spoke to several heart surgeons who said that a lot of the time when they do open heart surgery they find cancer.  I am wondering if it is because of all the radiation heart patients are exposed to with testing.