评估电离辐射对概念的影响以及怀孕期间暴露时间的关系，考虑减轻电离辐射对怀孕期间潜在危害的策略。将同行评议文献中报告的入口KERMA数据与实验或蒙特卡罗建模公布的组织和器官剂量每个入口KERMA相结合，估计从特定程序中可能接收到的总剂量。综述同行评议文献中关于剂量减轻策略、最佳屏蔽做法、同意、辅导和新兴技术的数据。 对于不将概念包括在主要辐射束中使用电离辐射的程序，典型剂量远低于引起组织反应的阈值，诱发儿童癌症的风险很低。对于包含概念在主要辐射场中的程序，较长的透视介入过程或多相/多次暴露可能接近或超过组织反应的阈值，诱发癌症的风险必须与执行（或不执行）成像检查的预期风险/效益权衡。靶器官屏蔽不再被视为最佳做法。全身DWI / MRI、双能CT和超低剂量研究等新兴技术日益重要，可用于弥补总剂量减少策略。 在使用电离辐射方面应遵循“尽量少使用、最少剂量”原则，考虑潜在的收益和风险。然而，正如Wieseler等人（2010）所述，对于重要的临床诊断，不应该拒绝任何检查。最佳实践需要更新当前可用技术和指南。 ©2023年。作者（s）独家授权给斯普林格科学+商业媒体有限公司，斯普林格自然的一部分。

To review the effects of ionizing radiation to the conceptus and the relationship to the timing of the exposure during pregnancy. To consider strategies that would mitigate potential harms associated with exposure to ionizing radiation during pregnancy.Data reported in the peer-reviewed literature on entrance KERMA received from specific radiological examinations were combined with published results from experiment or Monte Carlo modeling of tissue and organ doses per entrance KERMA to estimate total doses that could be received from specific procedures. Data reported in the peer-reviewed literature on dose mitigation strategies, best practices for shielding, consent, counseling and emerging technologies were reviewed.For procedures utilizing ionizing radiation for which the conceptus is not included in the primary radiation beam, typical doses are well below the threshold for causing tissue reactions and the risk of induction of childhood cancer is low. For procedures that include the conceptus in the primary radiation field, longer fluoroscopic interventional procedures or multiphase/multiple exposures potentially could approach or exceed thresholds for tissue reactions and the risk of cancer induction must be weighed against the expected risk/benefit of performing (or not) the imaging examination. Gonadal shielding is no longer considered best practice. Emerging technologies such as whole-body DWI/MRI, dual-energy CT and ultralow dose studies are gaining importance for overall dose reduction strategies.The ALARA principle, considering potential benefits and risks should be followed with respect to the use of ionizing radiation. Nevertheless, as Wieseler et al. (2010) state, "no examination should be withheld when an important clinical diagnosis is under consideration." Best practices require updates on current available technologies and guidelines.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.