[Intl_DxMedPhys] Article in today's ACR Daily Email newsletter

[Matt Wait]

Well observed, Bob. This limitation is pretty glaring: "Incomplete ascertainment of CT exposure and underlying indication may have contributed to residual confounding." To be entirely honest, I'm not sure how this meets the threshold for publication. Annals of Internal Medicine has an impact factor of 15.3.

Matt Wait, MS, DABR, DABSNM, MRSE
Senior Diagnostic Physicist
Assistant Radiation Safety Officer
Assistant Residency Director
Kaiser Permanente
Southern Permanente Medical Group
Medical Imaging Technology and Informatics
4867 Sunset Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90027
x5347 (office)
(818) 232-2427 (mobile phone)

From: Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list-bounces+matt.wait=kp.org at lists.osu.edu> On Behalf Of Bob Kobistek via Intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 8:58 AM
To: International Diagnostic Medical Physics List <intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: [Intl_DxMedPhys] Article in today's ACR Daily Email newsletter

Check this out: Exposure to Computed Tomography Before Pregnancy and Risk for Pregnancy Loss and Congenital Anomalies: A Population-Based Cohort Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 0, No 0 Be prepared for the mainstream press to get hold

Caution: This email came from outside Kaiser Permanente. Do not open attachments or click on links if you do not recognize the sender.

________________________________
Check this out:  Exposure to Computed Tomography Before Pregnancy and Risk for Pregnancy Loss and Congenital Anomalies: A Population-Based Cohort Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 0, No 0<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/ANNALS-24-03479__;!!KGKeukY!2RFiwk-DhCEzP1hEYpNHsMYSNb-6qlx646jkJZ7UBqULioIM9Ol_odI2MlR7Mc0MTMfHfEHYejqKxkMqHbZzoLKNlDRBQo5Mj54Qeg$>

Be prepared for the mainstream press to get hold of this and sensationalize it.

My observations:

Is the increase in spontaneous abortion due to the CT scans or the reasons the patients got the CT scans to begin with? The authors acknowledge that the majority of the cohort had diabetes, hypertension, obesity or were smokers. (Smokers and pregnant???)

The results also make the statement, "The risk observed with head CT was not consistently lower than with CT of the abdomen, pelvis, or lower spine."  How is that possible unless the increased rate of spontaneous abortion was due to some factor other than X-ray exposure?



Robert J. Kobistek, MS, FACR, DABR, MRSE(MRSC(tm))
Medical Physicist
RJK Medical Physics, Inc.
440-463-7879

NOTICE TO RECIPIENT:  If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. v.173.295  Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/intl_dxmedphys_wd_osu_list/attachments/20250911/58975427/attachment.html>