Search

Featured Application: Importance of the evaluation of the physician's eye exposure to radiation during 198Au grain brachytherapy, given that the eye dose limit has been reduced drastically from 150 to 20 mSv/year. Brachytherapy is a practical, effective procedure for the local treatment of cancer; it delivers a high radiation dose to a limited tissue volume while sparing the surrounding normal tissues. Although the clinical benefit of brachytherapy is clear, there have been very few studies on the radiation dose received by physicians during the procedure. Furthermore, no study has investigated the eye radiation dose received by physicians performing 198Au grain (seed) brachytherapy, using an eye dosimeter. Recently, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommended significantly reducing the occupational lens dose limit, from 150 to 20 mSv/yr (100 mSv/5 years). Therefore, it has become essential to evaluate the eye radiation doses of medical workers. We evaluated the eye radiation dose of a brachytherapy physician performing 198Au permanent grain implantation for tongue cancer; this is the first study on this topic. The maximum eye dose was ~0.1 mSv/procedure, suggesting that it is unlikely to exceed the ICRP limit (20 mSv/yr) for the lens, unless many procedures are performed with inappropriate radiation protection. To reduce the dose of radiation received by 198Au grain brachytherapy physicians, it is necessary to use additional lead shielding equipment when preparing the treatment needles, i.e., when loading the grains. This study provides useful information on radiation exposure of physicians conducting 198Au permanent grain brachytherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We quantified the level of backscatter radiation generated from physicians' heads using a phantom. We also evaluated the shielding rate of the protective eyewear and optimal placement of the eye-dedicated dosimeter (skin surface or behind the Pb-eyewear). We performed diagnostic X-rays of two head phantoms: Styrofoam (negligible backscatter radiation) and anthropomorphic (included backscatter radiation). Radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeters were used to measure the eye-lens dose, with or without 0.07-mm Pb-equivalent protective eyewear. We used tube voltages of 50, 65 and 80 kV because the scattered radiation has a lower mean energy than the primary X-ray beam. The backscatter radiation accounted for 17.3–22.3% of the eye-lens dose, with the percentage increasing with increasing tube voltage. Furthermore, the shielding rate of the protective eyewear was overestimated, and the eye-lens dose was underestimated when the eye-dedicated dosimeter was placed behind the protective eyewear. We quantified the backscatter radiation generated from physicians' heads. To account for the effect of backscatter radiation, an anthropomorphic, rather than Styrofoam, phantom should be used. Close contact of the dosimeter with the skin surface is essential for accurate evaluation of backscatter radiation from physician's own heads. To assess the eye-lens dose accurately, the dosimeter should be placed near the eye. If the dosimeter is placed behind the lens of the protective eyewear, we recommend using a backscatter radiation calibration factor of 1.2–1.3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), which lowered the lens equivalent dose limit, Japan lowered the lens dose limit from 150 mSv/year to 100 mSv/5 years and 50 mSv/year, with this new rule taking effect on April 1, 2021. DOSIRIS® is a dosimeter that can accurately measure lens dose. Herein, we investigated lens dose in interventional cardiology physicians one year before and after the reduction of the lens dose limit using a neck dosimeter and lens dosimeter measurements. With an increase in the number of cases, both personal dose equivalent at 0.07 mm [Hp(0.07), neck dosimeter] and personal dose equivalent at 3 mm depth [Hp(3), lens dosimeter] increased for most of the physicians. The Hp(3) of the lens considering the shielding effect of the Pb glasses using lens dosimeter exceeded 20 mSv/year for two of the 14 physicians. Protection from radiation dose will become even more important in the future, as these two physicians may experience radiation dose exceeding 100 mSv/5 years. The average dose per procedure increased, but not significantly. There was a strong correlation between the neck dosimeter and lens dosimeter scores, although there was no significant change before and after the lens dose limit was lowered. This correlation was particularly strong for physicians who primarily treated patients. As such, it is possible to infer accurate lens doses from neck doses in physicians who primarily perform diagnostics. However, it is desirable to use a dosimeter that can directly measure Hp(3) because of the high lens dose., (© 2024 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.)

Given the new recommendations for occupational eye lens doses, various lead glasses have been used to reduce irradiation of interventional radiologists. However, the protection afforded by lead glasses over prescription glasses (thus over-glasses-type eyewear) has not been considered in detail. We used a phantom to compare the protective effects of such eyewear and regular eyewear of 0.07 mm lead-equivalent thickness. The shielding rates behind the eyewear and on the surface of the left eye of an anthropomorphic phantom were calculated. The left eye of the phantom was irradiated at various angles and the shielding effects were evaluated. We measured the radiation dose to the left side of the phantom using RPLDs attached to the left eye and to the surface/back of the left eyewear. Over-glasses-type eyewear afforded good protection against x-rays from the left and below; the average shielding rates on the surface of the left eye ranged from 0.70-0.72. In clinical settings, scattered radiation is incident on physicians' eyes from the left and below, and through any gap in lead glasses. Over-glasses-type eyewear afforded better protection than regular eyewear of the same lead-equivalent thickness at the irradiation angles of concern in clinical settings. Although clinical evaluation is needed, we suggest over-glasses-type Pb eyewear even for physicians who do not wear prescription glasses., (© 2024 Society for Radiological Protection. Published on behalf of SRP by IOP Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To verify the effectiveness of optimizing the number of mask images in DSA for radiation dose reduction during cerebral angiography., Methods: A total of 60 angiography sessions in 2 times for 30 patients performed by the same operator were included in this study. In order to compare the effects of optimization to change the injection delay time of DSA from 1 s to the shortest possible time, the number of mask images, the number of imaging frames, and radiation doses between sessions were compared and analyzed retrospectively., Results: In one DSA run, the number of mask images was decreased from 6 (5-7) to 3 (2-3) frames (p<0.01)/57.1% (median [IQR]/reduction rate), the number of imaging frames was decreased from 34 (32-36) to 32 (29-34) frames (p<0.01)/7.9%, and the radiation dose was decreased from 33 (23-47) to 30 (21-40) mGy (p<0.01)/8.3%. In magnification angiography, the reductions rate was significantly increased. In one angiography session, the number of mask images was decreased from 45 (35-72) to 19 (16-34) frames (p<0.01)/54.6%, the number of imaging frames was decreased from 242 (199-385) to 211 (181-346) frames (p<0.01)/8.3%, the radiation dose of DSA was decreased from 295 (190-341) to 242 (167-305) mGy (p<0.01)/11.6%, and the total radiation dose was decreased from 369 (259-418) to 328 (248-394) mGy (p<0.01)/7.5%., Conclusion: Using the shortest possible injection delay time for the number of mask image optimization was an effective radiation dose reduction method.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare the temperature dependence of a scintillation survey meter with and without the temperature compensation function. Investigation of temperature dependence is important to make precise measurements in various environments., Method: The experiment was conducted using the NaI (Tl) scintillation survey meter with the temperature compensation function (TCS-1172) and the NaI (Tl) and CsI (Tl) scintillation survey meters without the temperature compensation function (TCS-171, PDR-111). In all, 1 cm dose equivalent rate (µSv/h) was measured by changing the room temperature from 10 to 40 degree Celsius., Result: The results showed that the scintillation survey meter with the temperature compensation function had almost no change in the measured values with changes in room temperature, whereas the 1 cm dose equivalent rate of the scintillation survey meter without the temperature compensation function changed by a maximum of -7.2 (%/10°C) as temperature increased., Conclusion: This study confirms that the scintillation survey meter with the temperature compensation function was less dependent on temperature, and stable measurement was possible. However, it was suggested that the scintillation survey meter without the temperature compensation function might cause a drop in the measured value as the temperature rises.