A novel device for automatic withdrawal and accurate calibration of 99m-technetium radiopharmaceuticals to minimise radiation exposure to nuclear medicine staff and patient

2012 ◽  
Vol 151 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Nazififard ◽  
S. Mahdizadeh ◽  
A. S. Meigooni ◽  
M. Alavi ◽  
K. Y. Suh
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Novel Device

Radiation exposure in the environment of patients after application of radiopharmaceuticals

2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (06) ◽  
pp. 267-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Boldt ◽  
C. Kobe ◽  
W. Eschner ◽  
H. Schicha ◽  
F. Sudbrock
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radioactive Source ◽  
Time Intervals ◽  
The Public ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Diagnostic Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Photon Dose ◽  
Order Of Magnitude ◽  
Study Dose

Summary Aim: After application of radiopharmaceuticals the patient becomes a radioactive source which leads to radiation exposure in the proximity. The photon dose rates after administration of different radiopharmaceuticals used in diagnostic nuclear medicine were measured at several distances and different time intervals. These data are of importance for estimating the exposure of technologists and members of the public. Patients, method: In this study dose rates were measured for 67 patients after application of the following radiopharmaceuticals: 99mTc-HDP as well as 99mTcpertechnetate, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, 111In-Octreotid and Zevalin® and 123I-mIBG in addition to 123I-NaI. The dose rates were measured immediately following application at six different distances to the patient. After two hours the measurements were repeated and – whenever possible – after 24 hours and seven days. Results: Immediately following application the highest dose rates were below 1 mSv / h: with a maximum at 780 μSv/h for 18F (370 MBq), 250 μSv/h for 99mTc (700 MBq), 150 μSv/h for 111In (185 MBq) and 132 μSv/ h for 123I (370 MBq). At a distance of 0.5 m the values decrease significantly by an order of magnitude. Two hours after application the values are diminished to 1/3 (99mTc, 18F), to nearly ½ (123I) but remain in the same order of magnitude for the longer-lived 111In radiopharmaceuticals. Conclusion: For greater distances the doses remain below the limits outlined in the national legislation.

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.

scholarly journals Assessment of internal radiation exposure of nuclear medicine workers using whole body gamma counter

2020 ◽  
Vol 1497 ◽  
pp. 012026
Author(s):  
A Norhayati ◽  
M S Suzilawati ◽  
Z Nur Khairunisa ◽  
Y T L Raymond ◽  
A Azimawati
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Internal Radiation ◽  
Gamma Counter

scholarly journals [OA203] Assessment of radiation exposure in a newly formed nuclear medicine department

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Panayiotis Hadjitheodorou ◽  
Irene Polycarpou ◽  
Andreas Fesas ◽  
Reza Pourkhessalian ◽  
Alexis Vrachimis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Medicine Department ◽  
Nuclear Medicine Department

scholarly journals Radiation Hazard, Safety, Control and Protection

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-103
Author(s):  
Md Hafizur Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Ionizing Radiation ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Radiation Protection ◽  
Imaging Techniques ◽  
Paediatric Population ◽  
Radiation Hazard ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Safety Control ◽  
Radiological Procedures

The field of Radiology and Nuclear medicine has advanced from era of X-rays to today's modern imaging techniques, most of which use the ionizing radiation. With the benefits of better diagnosis and treatment, it has caused manifold increase in radiation exposure to the patients and the radiology and nuclear medicine personnel. Many studies done till date have clearly documented the harmful effects of ionizing radiation from radiation exposure, especially cancer. This is more important in paediatric population as their tissues are more radiosensitive, and they have more years to live. Diagnostic and therapeutic radiological procedures including nuclear medicine are integral part of modern medical practices, exposing both patients and medical staff to ionizing radiation. Without proper protective measures, this radiation causes many negative health effects. Hence, proper knowledge and awareness regarding the radiation hazards and radiation protection is mandatory for health professionals, especially the nuclear medicine and radiology professionals. International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) has recommended two basic principles of radiation protection, justification of the practice and optimization of protection. Faridpur Med. Coll. J. Jul 2019;14(2): 100-103

Radiation exposure to nuclear medicine staff involved in PET/CT practice in Serbia

2014 ◽  
Vol 162 (4) ◽  
pp. 577-585 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Antic ◽  
O. Ciraj-Bjelac ◽  
J. Stankovic ◽  
D. Arandjic ◽  
N. Todorovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Pet Ct
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document