From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine>
  4. Summary and Comment

Antepartum Dental X-Rays Inhibit Fetal Growth

Here is surprising news about a risk for low birth weight.

Ionizing radiation inhibits growth in many situations. To determine whether local irradiation to the mother's head and neck affects fetal growth, investigators compared the dental records of 1117 women who delivered low-birth-weight (LBW) infants with the records of 4468 maternal controls; the women were members of the same dental insurance plan.

Investigators found diagnostic dental x-rays to be an independent risk factor for delivery of an LBW infant. After adjustment for all dental procedures, receiving a thyroid radiation dose of greater than 0.4 mGy significantly increased risk for LBW and term LBW (odds ratios, 2.54 and 3.54, respectively). Each cumulative 1-mGy increase in thyroid radiation dose increased the OR by 2.59 for term LBW. More than two thirds of antepartum maternal dental radiography occurred in the first trimester, and exposure during this period was associated with a very high risk for LBW (OR, 5.49).

Comment: Women should not have diagnostic dental x-rays during pregnancy or while trying to conceive. The risk for delivering a term LBW infant after undergoing first-trimester dental radiography is striking. As the authors point out, these data were obtained from an affluent, homogeneous, insured population that may not be representative of other populations. Nonetheless, if these findings are broadly applicable, elimination of dental diagnostic x-rays during pregnancy might reduce the prevalence of term LBW in the U.S. by as much as 5%.

— F. Bruder Stapleton, MD

Published in Journal Watch Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine June 14, 2004

Citation(s):

Hujoel PP et al. Antepartum dental radiography and infant low birth weight. JAMA 2004 Apr 28; 291:1987-93.

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. Please consider this when composing your remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Article Tools

Reader Remarks

Sign-In

Forgot your password?

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 2004. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.