Investigation concerning the Radiation Exposure of the Medical Personnel during F-l8-FDG-PET Studies

2000 ◽  
Vol 39 (03) ◽  
pp. 77-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Will ◽  
B. Beuthien-Baumann ◽  
H. Linemann
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Fdg Pet ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Radiation Shielding ◽  
Annual Dose ◽  
Radiation Level ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Thermoluminescent Dosimeters ◽  
Reduce Radiation Exposure ◽  
The Mean

Summary Aim: The aim of the investigation was the identification of those working steps with the highest radiation exposure for the medical personnel during F-l8-FDG-PET studies and to evaluate the effectiveness of radiation protection devices and instructions developed in our PET-center. Methods: The personal dose and hand dose were measured for each working procedure during F-l8-FDG-PET studies using electronic personal dosimeters and thermoluminescent dosimeters respectively. Additionally, measurements of the radiation level near the patient were taken. Results: The mean personal dose resulting from syringe preparation was 1 μSv/syringe, from injection 3 μSv/patient, from blood sampling during quantitative studies 6 μSv/study, and from positioning and handling of the patient 6 μSv/study. The mean hand dose per syringe preparation was 710 μSv for each hand. The mean hand dose during injection was 13 μSv for the right hand and 27 μSv for the left hand. All above mentioned values were measured applying the routine radiation shielding in use in our PET center. Conclusion: With the developed radiation shielding and means to reduce radiation exposure applied the allowed annual dose for medical personnel are not exceeded. One exception is the hand dose resulting from syringe preparation. An automatic or remote filling device should be used at this working step.

Assessment of Radiation Protection in Hand-Shielding Products With Mini C-Arm Fluoroscopy

Hand ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 155894471986593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew B. Cantlon ◽  
Asif M. Ilyas
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Index Finger ◽  
Proximal Phalanx ◽  
Left Index Finger ◽  
Surgical Glove ◽  
Thermoluminescent Dosimeters ◽  
Intraoperative Fluoroscopy ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Right ◽  
Free Metal

Background: Previous studies have highlighted the particular risk of radiation exposure to the surgeon’s hands with intraoperative fluoroscopy. Although evidence exists that shielding equipment for the hands reduces exposure, the extent of protection is not well understood. Therefore, we set out to determine the degree to which radiation exposure to the surgeon’s hands is decreased with hand-shielding products. Methods: An anthropomorphic model was positioned to simulate a surgeon sitting at a hand table. Thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed on the proximal phalanx of each index finger. The right index finger dosimeter was covered with a standard polyisoprene surgical glove (control arm), whereas the left index finger dosimeter was covered with commercially available hand-shielding products (study arm): lead-free metal-oxide gloves, leaded gloves, and radiation-attenuating cream. Mini fluoroscope position, configuration, and settings were standardized. The model was scanned for 15 continuous minutes in each test run, and each comparative arm was run 3 times. Results: The mean radiation dose absorbed by the control and variable dosimeters across all tests was 44.8 mrem (range, 30-54) and 18.6 mrem (range, 14-26), respectively. Each hand-shielding product resulted in statistically lower radiation exposure than a single polyisoprene surgical glove. Conclusions: The mean radiation exposure to the hands was significantly decreased when protected by radiation-attenuating options. Each product individually resulted in a statistically significant decrease in hand exposure compared with the control. We recommend that in addition to efforts to decrease radiation exposure, surgeons consider routine use of hand-shielding products when using mini c-arm fluoroscopy.

Radiation doses deriving from patients treated with 166Ho-ferric hydroxide

2003 ◽  
Vol 42 (06) ◽  
pp. 251-254
Author(s):  
C. Pirich ◽  
P. John ◽  
S. Ofluoglu ◽  
H. Sinzinger ◽  
E. Havlik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Ferric Hydroxide ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Annual Dose ◽  
Tracer Injection ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Protection Devices

Summary Aim: To estimate radiation doses deriving from patients treated with 166Ho ferric hydroxide. Methods: For radiation synoviorthesis about 900 ± 100 MBq 166Ho ferric hydroxide was injected into the knee joint of 16 patients. To estimate the radiation exposure of persons in the neighbourhood of the patients measurements of the dose rates were performed at 0.5 m, 1 m and 2 m distance of the treated joint 10 min after tracer injection. Measurements were carried out with and without radiation protection devices of the syringe. Results: The initial values of the dose rate were 11.9 μSv/h at 0.5 m, 3.5 μSv/h at 1 m and 1 μSv/h at 2 m distance, respectively. The whole body doses were 2.9 μSv for the physician and 4.6 μSv for the technologist. The finger doses for the technologist and the physician were ranging from 65 to 111 μSv. After discharge at home other persons might receive 118 μSv. Conclusion: Our results, under very strict assumptions, clearly demonstrate that the calculated radiation exposure to medical and non medical personnel is well below the maximum annual dose limit. The use of any additional radiation protection device as syringe shielding does not significantly lower radiation exposure.

scholarly journals Radiation exposure to the urology surgeon during retrograde intrarenal surgery

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. e0247833
Author(s):  
Il woo park ◽  
Su Jin Kim ◽  
Dongseong Shin ◽  
Sung Ryul Shim ◽  
Hyun Kyung Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Hounsfield Unit ◽  
Renal Calculi ◽  
Exposure Dose ◽  
National Council ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Common Procedure ◽  
Reduce Radiation Exposure ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Radiation Exposure Dose

Retrograde intrarenal surgery is a common procedure that carries a risk of radiation exposure for urologists. This study aimed to measure the amount of radiation that urologists are exposed to during surgery, and to estimate how many procedures can be safely performed by one urologist per year. Variables that affect radiation exposure were also identified. Radiation exposure doses were measured for the eye, neck, chest, arms, and hands of a urologist who performed 226 retrograde intrarenal surgeries. To determine how many procedures could be safely performed per year, the Annual Permissible Occupational Exposure Radiation Dose Guidelines of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements were consulted. Correlations between radiation exposure dose and the patient’s age, sex, body mass index, stone number/burden/laterality/location/Hounsfield unit, and their renal calculi were calculated. The mean surgery and fluoroscopy durations were 83.2 and 5.13 min; the mean tube voltage and current were 68.88 kV and 2.48 mA, respectively. Cumulative radiation doses for the eye, neck, chest, right upper arm, left hand, and right hand were 65.53, 69.95, 131.79, 124.43, 165.66, and 126.64 mSv, respectively. Radiation reduction rates for lead collars and aprons were 97% and 98%, respectively. If the urologists wear only radiation shields and lead apron but do not wear safety glasses during RIRS, the recommended by the ICRP publication 103 is taken into consideration, our results showed that 517 RIRS can be performed per year safely. However, if no protective measures are taken, this number decreases to only 85 RIRS per year. At all measurement sites, significant correlations were observed between the radiation exposure dose and stone numbers and Hounsfield unit values. In conclusion, it is imperative that urologists wear protective gear. Greater effort should be made to reduce radiation exposure when renal calculi have a large number of stones or large Hounsfield unit values.

scholarly journals Occupational Radiation Exposure to Workers Used18F-FDG

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 100
Author(s):  
Ahmed Ali Wabdan
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Risk ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Thermoluminescent Dosimeters ◽  
Medical Physicist ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Medical Physicists ◽  
The Mean ◽  
18F Fdg

The increasing interest of medical institutes in the development of imaging services to include the hybrid system [Positron Emission Tomography combined with Computed Tomography(PET/CT)], this system is acquiring explosive growth due to its ability to accurately detect and stage many types of cancer and follow the progress of treatments. An increasing demand for use of (18F-FDG PET) in oncology has been the main reason for its growth. The physical characteristics of positron emissions result in higher radiation risk for staff and growing use of PET/CT for diagnostic purposes increase radiation exposure. The objective of this study was to estimate the radiation exposure to the medical physicists, technicians and nurses working in three Egyptian nuclear medicine institutes under our investigations, based on the whole body collective dose measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and the effective dose per study received by medical staff were measured by electronic pocked dosimeters and the finger doses by ring dosimeter during a period of six months. The (mean± SD) dose measured per PET/CT procedure were (2.45±0.137, 3.22±0.218 and 1.69±0.11) μSv for the medical physicist, technician and nurse respectively. The (mean± SD) dose measured per MBq of 18F-FDG were (7.35±0.43, 9.73±0.66 and 5.13±0.33) nSv/MBq for the medical physicist, technician and nurse respectively. The (mean± SD) finger dose measured per 18F-FDGPET/CT scans were (179.9±24.94, 8.82±2.912 and 24.15±4.164) μSv for the medical physicist, technician and nurse respectively.

scholarly journals Occupational Radiation Exposure during Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Usefulness of Radiation Protective Curtains

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoyuki Minami ◽  
Tamito Sasaki ◽  
Masahiro Serikawa ◽  
Michihiro Kamigaki ◽  
Masanobu Yukutake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Radiation Doses ◽  
Endoscopic Retrograde ◽  
Occupational Radiation Exposure ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
The Mean ◽  
High Doses ◽  
Occupational Radiation

Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of radiation protective curtains in reducing the occupational radiation exposure of medical personnel.Methods. We studied medical staff members who had assisted in 80 consecutive therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures. Use of radiation protective curtains mounted to the X-ray tube was determined randomly for each procedure, and radiation doses were measured with electronic pocket dosimeters placed outside the protective apron.Results. When protective curtains were not used, the mean radiation doses to endoscopists, first assistants, second assistants, and nurses were 340.9, 27.5, 45.3, and 33.1 µSv, respectively; doses decreased to 42.6, 4.2, 13.1, and 10.6 µSv, respectively, when protective curtains were used (P<0.01). When the patient had to be restrained during ERCP (n=8), the radiation dose to second assistants without protective curtains increased by a factor of 9.95 (P<0.01) relative to cases in which restraint was not required.Conclusions. During ERCP, not only endoscopists, but also assistants and nurses were exposed to high doses of radiation. Radiation exposure to staff members during ERCP was reduced with the use of protective curtains.

Surgeon’s radiation exposure during percutaneous vertebroplasty

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Synowitz ◽  
Juergen Kiwit
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Percutaneous Vertebroplasty ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Reduction Rate ◽  
Dose Area Product ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Right Hand ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Area Product ◽  
The Right

Object In this study the authors evaluated levels of radiation exposure to surgeons’ protected and unprotected hands during fluoroscopically assisted vertebroplasty. Methods The amount of radiation administered to 30 patients during 41 procedures in a controlled prospective trial over 6 months was assessed, comparing radiation exposure to the right and left hands in two neurosurgeons. Effective skin doses were evaluated using thermoluminescent finger dosimeters (ring dosimeters). The ratios of finger dosimeter exposure were compared between the glove-protected and unprotected left hands of two surgeons and both unprotected right hands. In addition, dose-area product (DAP) and fluoroscopy times were recorded in all patients. The mean treatment-effective dose to the surgeons’ hands was 0.49 ± 0.4 mSv in the glove-protected left hand and 1.81 ± 1.31 mSv in the unprotected left hand (p < 0.05). The mean effective hand doses were 0.59 ± 0.55 mSv in the unprotected right hand of the glove-protected surgeon and 0.62 ± 0.55 mSv in the unprotected right hand of the control surgeon. The total corresponding fluoroscopy time was 38.55 minutes for the protected surgeon and 41.23 minutes for the unprotected one (p > 0.05). Lead glove shielding resulted in a radiation dose reduction of 75%. The total DAP for all procedures was 256,496 mGy/cm2 and 221,408 mGy/cm2 (p >0.05) for the protected and unprotected surgeons, respectively. Conclusions This study emphasizes the importance of surgeons wearing lead glove protection on their leading hands during percutaneous vertebroplasty procedures and demonstrates a 75% reduction rate of exposure to radiation.

scholarly journals Reduction of radiation exposure to operating physician and assistant using a real-time auditory feedback dosimeter during femoral artery puncturing: a study on swine model

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Umair Ahmad Khan ◽  
Byung-Ju Yi
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Auditory Feedback ◽  
Swine Model ◽  
Radiation Measurement ◽  
Radiation Dose Rate ◽  
Left Hand ◽  
Body Side ◽  
Reduce Radiation Exposure

Abstract Background Real-time dosimeters may create a relatively safer environment not only for the patient but also for the physician and the assistant as well. We propose the use of a real-time radiation measurement dosimeter having auditory feedback to reduce radiation exposure. Methods Radiation dose rates were measured for 30 fluoroscopy-guided puncturing procedures of femoral arteries in swine. Fifteen puncturing procedures were performed with real-time radiation measurement dosimeter having auditory feedback and other 15 were performed without auditory feedback dosimeter by an interventional cardiologist with 10 years of experience. Results The left body side of the operating physician (38%, p < 0.001) and assistant (25%, p < 0.001) was more exposed as compared to the right body side. Radiation dose rate to the left hand, left arm and left leg were reduced from 0.96 ± 0.10 to 0.79 ± 0.12 mSv/h (17% reduction, p < 0.001), from 0.11 ± 0.02 to 0.07 ± 0.01 mSv/h (36% reduction, p < 0.001) and from 0.22 ± 0.06 to 0.15 ± 0.02 mSv/h (31% reduction, p < 0.001) with the use of auditory feedback dosimeter, respectively. The mean fluoroscopic time was reduced from 4.8 ± 0.43 min to 4.2 ± 0.53 min (p < 0.001). The success rate of performing arterial puncturing was 100%. Conclusions The use of auditory feedback dosimeter resulted in reduction in effective dose. The sound beep alerted the physician from the danger of exposure, and this approach induced awareness and protective mindset to the operating physician and assistant.

Radiation exposure of the staff at the therapeutic and diagnostic nuclear medicine department

2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (04) ◽  
pp. 175-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Dolezal
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Effective Dose ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Annual Effective Dose ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
Professional Groups ◽  
Personal Dosimetry ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Administered Activity

SummaryAim: To assess a radiation exposure and the quality of radiation protection concerning a nuclear medicine staff at our department as a six-year retrospective study. Therapeutic radionuclides such as 131I, 153Sm, 186Re, 32P, 90Y and diagnostic ones as a 99mTc, 201Tl, 67Ga, 111In were used. Material, method: The effective dose was evaluated in the period of 2001–2006 for nuclear medicine physicians (n = 5), technologists (n = 9) and radiopharmacists (n = 2). A personnel film dosimeter and thermoluminescent ring dosimeter for measuring (1-month periods) the personal dose equivalent Hp(10) and Hp(0,07) were used by nuclear medicine workers. The wearing of dosimeters was obligatory within the framework of a nationwide service for personal dosimetry. The total administered activity of all radionuclides during these six years at our department was 17,779 GBq (99mTc 14 708 GBq, 131I 2490 GBq, others 581 GBq). The administered activity of 99mTc was similar, but the administered activity of 131I in 2006 increased by 200%, as compared with the year 2001. Results: The mean and one standard deviation (SD) of the personal annual effective dose (mSv) for nuclear medicine physicians was 1.9 ± 0.6, 1.8 ± 0.8, 1.2 ± 0.8, 1.4 ± 0.8, 1.3 ± 0.6, 0.8 ± 0.4 and for nuclear medicine technologists was 1.9 ± 0.8, 1.7 ± 1.4, 1.0 ± 1.0, 1.1 ± 1.2, 0.9 ± 0.4 and 0.7 ± 0.2 in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. The mean (n = 2, estimate of SD makes little sense) of the personal annual effective dose (mSv) for radiopharmacists was 3.2, 1.8, 0.6, 1.3, 0.6 and 0.3. Although the administered activity of 131I increased, the mean personal effective dose per year decreased during the six years. Conclusion: In all three professional groups of nuclear medicine workers a decreasing radiation exposure was found, although the administered activity of 131I increased during this six-year period. Our observations suggest successful radiation protection measures at our department.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document