Table 2.

Overview of published reports about chromosome aberrations induced by CT scans

Publication	Type of study	Number of patients	Type of chromosome aberrations	Staining method	Exposed dose	Number of lymphocytes analyzed	Radiation effect of CT
M’kacher et al., 2003; [45]	In vitro & in vivo	Adult patients (n = 10)	Translocations, dicentrics, rings, insertions and acentric fragments of painted chromosomes in metaphase and chromosome fragments in interphase (PCC)	FISH (chromosome DNA probes 1, 3, 4)	In vivo: 0.057 Gy; in vitro: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2 Gy		Significant increase in chromosomal fragments (PCC) but not chromosome aberrations in metaphase
Stephan et al., 2007; [39]	In vivo	Pediatric patients (n = 10)	Dicentric (dic) & excess acentrics (ace)	Fluorescence plus Giemsa (FPG) staining	Mean dose to blood: 12.9 mGy	>20 000 cells (average: 1000 cells/subject)	Yes (only in patients <10 years old)
Jost et al., 2009; [28]	In vitro		Dicentric	Fluorescence plus Giemsa (FPG) staining	0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 1 Gy	>1000 metaphase/subject (0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.1 Gy); >200 metaphase for subjects after 1 Gy IR	Yes
Golfier et al., 2009; [61]	In vitro		Dicentric	Fluorescence plus Giemsa (FPG) staining	0.025, 0.05, 0.1, 1 Gy	>1000 metaphase/subject (0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.1 Gy); >200 metaphase for subjects after 1 Gy IR	Yes
Abe et al., 2015; [41]	In vivo	Adult patients (n = 10)	Dicentric	Giemsa staining & PNA-FISH	5.78–60.27 mSv: mean 24.24 mSv	2000 metaphase/subject	Yes
Kanagaraj et al., 2015 [40]	In vivo	Adult patients (contrast scan: n = 14; brain plain scan: n = 13)	Chromosome aberrations (dicentric, chromosome/chromatid break) & MN	Giemsa staining	Eye: 2~520 mGy; forehead: 0.84–210 mGy; thyroid: 1.79~ 185	250–300 metaphase/subject (chromosome aberrations); 1000 binucleated cells (MN)	Yes
Abe et al., 2016; [62]	In vivo	Adult patients (n = 12)	Translocation	FISH (chromosome painting DNA probes 1, 2, 4)	5.78–60.27 mSv: mean 24.24 mSv	>5000 metaphase/subject	No significant increase in translocation after CT scan