Integrity of personal radiation protective equipment (PRPE): a 3-year longitudinal follow-up study

Background Personal radiation protective equipment (PRPE) such as lead aprons, vests, skirts and thyroid shields minimize radiation exposure of operators using ionizing radiation. However, PRPE might be prone to cracks and tears in the attenuating layer of the garments which results in inadequate radiation protection and increased operator dose. Currently, there are no uniform guidelines regarding regular inspection and/or rejection criteria of PRPE. Purpose This study aims to investigate the prevalence, qualification and quantification of PRPE integrity during a longitudinal follow-up. Methods All PRPE of a large, general hospital was yearly evaluated in the period 2018–2020. The equipment was inspected on a tele-operated X-ray table and cracks and tears were qualified and quantified using an X-ray opaque ruler. Rejection criteria of Lambert & McKeon were applied to accept or reject further use of the PRPE. In brief, all pieces, except for thyroid shields, with a total defect area larger than 670mm2 are rejected. For tears, specifically at the position of the gonads, an extra rejection criterion of 15mm2 is defined. For thyroid shields, the rejection criterion is set to 11mm2. Results In the 3-year follow-up period, a total of 915 PRPE were evaluated. 43.3% of PRPE showed tears and 29.3% needed to be rejected based on the Lambert & McKeon criteria. More specifically, in 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively, 17.4%, 16.9% and 21.2% were rejected. In the attached figure, typical examples of visualized defects are represented. The median tear area (interquartile range) was 12 (30) mm2. Remarkably, of 195 newly registered PRPE, 8.7% showed tears in the first year of use of which 88.2% needed to be rejected. In the latter case, the median tear area (interquartile range) was 40 (50) mm2. Information regarding purchase date and size is missing in respectively 45.5% and 50.7% of the cases. Additionally, 13.7% lacked information regarding lead equivalency. Conclusion PRPE are prone to tears and cracks. Up to 40% of PRPE showed tears and cracks resulting in nearly 20% rejections. Newly purchased PRPE are not guaranteed to remain free of cracks and tears in the first year of use. These results urge the importance for regular X-ray based integrity analysis of PRPE. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Radiation Injury and Emergency Medicine

The discovery of radiation has led to many advances. Guidelines have been created to minimize radiation exposure and treatment management following both unintentional and intentional exposure. The effects of radiation exposure on specific tissues varies. Tragic consequences can result, ranging from severe, acute injury to long- lasting effects that present years after the initial exposure. In this chapter we provide observations that demonstrate the importance of understanding guidelines to minimize radioactive exposure and the expectations and treatment management following exposure. For the safety and well-being of patients, health care professionals need to remain well-informed to minimize the risks of this tool.

The emerging role of quantitative imaging in asthma

Quantitative imaging of the lung has proved to be a valuable tool that has improved our understanding of asthma. CT, MRI, and positron emission tomography have all been utilized in asthma with each modality having its own distinct advantages and disadvantages. Research has now demonstrated that quantitative imaging plays a valuable role in characterizing asthma phenotypes and endotypes, as well as potentially predicting future asthma morbidity. Nonetheless, future research is needed in order to minimize radiation exposure, standardize reporting, and further delineate how imaging can predict longitudinal outcomes. With future work, quantitative imaging may make its way into the clinical care of asthma and change our practice.

Interventional Spine Considerations for Radiosensitivity in a Patient with Ligase IV Syndrome

Background: Patient selection plays a critical role in any interventional pain practice. Rare conditions may not always have clearly established guidelines for interventional pain procedures. Ligase IV (LIG4) syndrome is a rare inherited condition with a wide variety of features, including radiosensitivity.. Case Report: A 36-year-old woman with a known history of LIG4 syndrome presented with an acute on chronic left L5 and S1 radiculopathy from a large L5-S1 central disc herniation. In an effort to minimize radiation exposure, an ultrasound (US)-guided caudal epidural steroid injection was used to help manage her radicular leg pain. Conclusion: Interventional spine providers should be aware of rare radiosensitive conditions and strive to offer appropriate treatment alternatives. While limitations do exist, emerging US-guide spine procedures hold a distinct advantage for patients with radiosensitivities. Key words: Epidural steroid injection, Ligase IV syndrome, radiculopathy, radiology, radiosensitivity, ultrasound

Radiation Exposure in Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients: How Much Is Too Much?

We aimed to determine median cumulative radiation exposure in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients, proportion of patients with high radiation exposure (above annual average radiation per person of 6.2 mSv), and determine risk factors for high exposure. This was a retrospective chart review of PICU patients up to 18 years of age admitted to a large community hospital over 2 years. Radiologic studies and radiation exposure were determined for each patient, and total hospital radiation exposure was classified as high (>6.2 mSv) or not (≤6.2 mSv). Median radiation exposure per patient was 0.2 mSv (interquartile range = 2.1) and 11.7% of patients received >6.2 mSv radiation during their hospitalization. Factors associated with high radiation exposure included admission for trauma or surgery, number of computed tomography scans, age, and PICU length of stay (all P < .0001). We concluded that subsets of PICU patients are at risk of high radiation exposure. Policies and protocols may help minimize radiation exposure among PICU patients.