Evidence Hub

Fetal dose assessment in diagnostic and interventional radiology: a systematic review and European survey on methods, tools and dose ranges

Monte F, Huet C, Bassinet C, Chaikh A, Faj D, Kopacin V, Kralik I, Krstic D et al.

Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB), 2026

Abstract

Background: An increasing number of pregnant patients undergo radiological examinations or procedures each year, raising concerns about fetal radiation exposure. Several methods for fetal dose (FD) estimation are available. Within the EU-funded SONORA project, this study aims to identify, evaluate, and synthesize existing FD estimation methods used in diagnostic and interventional radiology (DIR). The objective is to compare evidence from the literature with real-world clinical practices across Europe, identifying discrepancies and areas requiring harmonization.

Materials and methods: A systematic review of PubMed and Embase databases (2000-2025) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, including 75 original studies. In parallel, a survey was distributed across European countries to investigate current FD estimation practices, tools, reported dose ranges, and optimization strategies. Fifty-two valid responses, mainly from Medical Physicists, were analyzed.

Results: Literature and survey data identified three main FD estimation approaches: Monte Carlo simulations, physical phantom measurements, and software tools, the latter being most used in clinical practice. Reported FD values varied by imaging modality: 10-60 mGy for abdominal or pelvic CT, 100 mGy) for interventional procedures. While strong agreement was observed on technical optimization strategies-such as collimation, tube current modulation, and reduction of CT acquisition phases-substantial variability persists…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free