Which abdominal imaging modality has the greatest environmental impact?
Medical imaging has experienced rapid growth in the U.S., with an estimated 80 million CT exams alone performed annually. Authors of a recent Journal of the American College of Radiology study asked: How does abdominal imaging impact the environment?
Imaging utilization is primarily concerned with diagnostic capability, but “as the utilization and export of medical imaging expand, the environmental impact of imaging will become increasingly relevant,” wrote lead author Marisa Martin, with the department of radiology at the University of Michigan, and colleagues.
The Michigan researchers used the life cycle assessment (LCA) tool to compare the environmental impact of abdominal ultrasound, CT and MRI. They measured device output during the production phase (manufacturing through purchase), use phase (purchase to end-of-life expectancy) and sensitivity (exam relationship to greenhouse gas emissions and electricity production).
Overall, compared to CT and MRI, ultrasound consumed less energy in the production and use stages, while also emitting the least amount of carbon dioxide equivalents in each phase. MRI needed the most energy, and it created more carbon dioxide and chemicals than the other modalities.
In all three imaging methods, Martin and colleagues found total energy output per exam was reduced on a 24-hour schedule compared to the workday variety.
“Our estimates of energy use and emissions in abdominal imaging are not intended to direct individual patient management,” the group noted. “The estimates derived from the present analysis are relevant on a societal, rather than an individual, level and have the potential to contribute to decision making in several contexts.”
In developing countries, where reliable electricity sources and infrastructure are scarce, they suggested the findings may be used alongside economic analyses to guide decisions and policy.
Additionally, Martin et al. argued that the environmental impact of diagnostic imaging should be in the same conversations as improvement to spatial and temporal resolution in order to determine the “true” cost of imaging.
“In our opinion, smart growth in imaging should balance the goals of technological advancement with broader considerations such as the environmental impact of our progress,” Martin and colleagues concluded.
Matt joined Chicago’s TriMed team in 2018 covering all areas of health imaging after two years reporting on the hospital field. He holds a bachelor’s in English from UIC, and enjoys a good cup of coffee and an interesting documentary.