Expert Reaction

EXPERT REACTION: CT scans before conception linked to higher pregnancy risks

Publicly released:
Australia; International; VIC; WA
Photo by Accuray on Unsplash
Photo by Accuray on Unsplash

Exposure to CT scans before becoming pregnant is linked to an increasing risk of pregnancy loss and birth defects, according to international research. Researchers studied data from over five million pregnancies in Canada from 1992-2023, and how many CT scans the pregnant women had prior to conception. They say 101 in 1000 of all the pregnancies studied ended in pregnancy loss, but this rate increased to 117 with one CT scan, 130 for two scans and 142 for three or more scans. 62 per 1000 babies born live had a birth defect, increasing to 84 for one CT scan, 96 for two and 105 for three or more, the researchers add. Below, Australian researchers say it's possible other factors are influencing this increase in risk, including the reason why these women needed CT scans in the first place.

Media release

From: American College of Physicians

Pre-conception radiation exposure from CT scans increases risk for miscarriage and birth defects

A population-based cohort study evaluated the risk for spontaneous pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies in offspring of women exposed to computed tomography (CT) ionizing radiation before conception. The study found that exposure to CT imaging prior to conception may be associated with higher risks for spontaneous pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies. The findings suggest that alternative imaging methods to CT should be considered in young women when appropriate. The study is published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Researchers from Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Canada and colleagues studied data from 5,142,339 recognized pregnancies and 3,451,968 live births in Ontario, Canada between 1 April 1992 and 31 March 2023 among women aged 16 to 45 years. The primary exposure was the cumulative number of CT scans up to 4 weeks before estimated date of conception, and the secondary exposure was the number of CT scans limited to the abdomen, pelvis, lumbar spine, or sacral spine up to 4 weeks before the estimated date of conception. Outcomes were spontaneous pregnancy loss (miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, or stillbirth) among recognized pregnancies and congenital anomalies diagnosed within the first year of life among live births. Of 5,142,339 women with recognized pregnancies, 687,692 had a CT scan before conception. Of all recognized pregnancies, 10.4% ended in spontaneous pregnancy loss, including 468,092 miscarriages, 47,228 ectopic pregnancies, and 19,845 stillbirths. Relative to those without a prior CT scan (101 per 1000 recognized pregnancies), the rate of spontaneous pregnancy loss increased to 117 per 1000 in those with 1 CT scan, 130 per 1000 with 2 CT scans, and 142 per 1000 with 3 or more CT scans. The absolute rates of pregnancy loss were slightly higher when limited to CT imaging of abdomen, pelvis, and lower spine. Among those with a CT scan, the risk for spontaneous pregnancy loss gradually increased as the timing of the most recent CT scan became closer to the estimated conception date. Relative to those without a prior CT scan (62 per 1000 live birth pregnancies), the rate of congenital anomaly increased to 84 per 1000 in those with 1 CT scan, 96 per 1000 with 2 CT scans, and 105 per 1000 with 3 or more CT scans. These findings suggest exposure to radiation from CT imaging before conception increases the risks of pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies. The results can inform clinical practice and guidelines on radiologic imaging in women of reproductive age.

Expert Reaction

These comments have been collated by the Science Media Centre to provide a variety of expert perspectives on this issue. Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Views expressed are the personal opinions of the experts named. They do not represent the views of the SMC or any other organisation unless specifically stated.

Associate Professor Alex Polyakov is a Clinical Associate Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne and is a Medical Director of Genea Fertility Melbourne

"This impressive retrospective Canadian study, involving over five million pregnancies, examined whether CT scans carried out before conception might influence later pregnancy outcomes. The results showed a slight increase in miscarriage and congenital anomalies among women who had undergone CT scans before conceiving. At first glance, this sounds alarming. But the size of the increase was modest. For example, miscarriage occurred in about 10% of pregnancies without CT exposure, compared with 11.7% after a single scan. Such differences are statistically detectable in an extensive dataset, but may not be meaningful at the individual patient level. Another challenge is separating the effects of the scan itself from the reasons for having one. Women who undergo CT scans were more likely to have health conditions—such as diabetes, hypertension, or smoking—that themselves raise pregnancy risks. Also, a woman scanned for trauma, suspected cancer or serious medical condition may already have had an elevated baseline risk prior to a CT scan. Although the researchers attempted to adjust for these factors, some degree of “confounding” almost certainly remains. Association does not equal causation: just because one event follows another does not mean the first causes the second. The study relied on health-care databases, which cannot capture every miscarriage, anomaly or patient characteristic. This means the absolute risks are likely to be somewhat imprecise. Overall, the findings should not discourage appropriate CT imaging. The study does not prove that CT scans before pregnancy cause harm. Still, it reinforces the principle of caution: use CT when necessary, but preference non-radiation producing alternatives, such as ultrasound or MRI, where they can provide the same answers. The issue of accessibility and cost would need to be considered, as CT scans are more widely available and are likely to be more cost-effective compared to other imaging modalities." Last updated:  06 Sep 2025 12:57pm
Contact information
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.
Declared conflicts of interest None declared.

Dr Gavin Pereira is a Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Curtin University

"The Ontario cohort study reports a modest dose response between CT before pregnancy and risks of miscarriage and congenital anomalies. The main concern is confounding by indication, since many scans are prompted by conditions that themselves raise miscarriage risk, including major trauma, acute abdominal or pelvic emergencies and severe infection, none of which are fully captured in routine data. Because the analysis includes only recognised pregnancies, collider bias is also possible: if CT lowers fecundability and lower fecundability is linked to miscarriage, conditioning on conception selects more resilient exposed women and attenuates the observed effect. These opposing biases act in different directions, so the true effect size remains uncertain. Replication should use designs that strengthen causal inference. Clinicians should continue to interpret the associations cautiously and, where clinically reasonable, prefer non ionising imaging."

Last updated:  06 Sep 2025 12:58pm
Contact information
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.
Declared conflicts of interest None declared.

Attachments

Note: Not all attachments are visible to the general public. Research URLs will go live after the embargo ends.

Media Release American College of Physicians DOCX , 15.0 KB
Research American College of Physicians, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo ends
Editorial / Opinion American College of Physicians, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo ends
Journal/
conference:
Annals of Internal Medicine
Research:Paper
Organisation/s: Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Canada
Funder: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Media Contact/s
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.