Search

Fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures, including gastrointestinal stenting, balloon-assisted endoscopy (BAE), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), are essential for diagnosis and treatment in gastroenterology. Such procedures involve radiation exposure that necessitates strict safety measures to protect patients, doctors, and medical staff. The April 2020 update to Japan's Ionizing Radiation Injury Prevention Regulations for occupational exposure reduced the lens exposure dose limit to approximately one-seventh of its previous level. This change highlights the need for improved safety protocols. Without adaptation, the sustainability of fluoroscopy-based endoscopic techniques could be at risk due to the potential to exceed these new limits. This review examines the current state of medical radiation exposure in the field of gastroenterology in Japan and discusses the findings of the REX-GI study., (© 2024. Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.)

This study aimed to examine occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In this multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study, we collected data regarding occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during ERCP. We measured radiation exposure of patients and examined its correlation with occupational exposure. In dosimetrically-measured ERCPs (n = 631), the median air kerma at the patient entrance reference point, air kerma-area product, and fluoroscopy time were 49.6 mGy, 13.5 Gycm 2 , and 10.9 min, respectively. The median estimated annual radiation dose to the lens of the eyes was 3.7, 2.2, and 2.4 mSv for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. Glass badge over lead aprons and eye dosimeter results were similar in operators but differed in assistants and nurses. A strong correlation was shown between eye dosimeter measurements and patients' radiation exposure. The shielding rates of the lead glasses were 44.6%, 66.3%, and 51.7% for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. This study revealed the actual occupational exposure dose for the lens of the eyes during ERCP and the efficacy of lead glass. Values of radiation exposure to patients can help estimate exposure to the lens of the eyes of medical staff., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Fluoroscopy-guided endoscopic procedures (FGEPs) are rapidly gaining popularity in the field of gastroenterology. Radiation is a well-known health hazard. Gastroenterologists who perform FGEPs are required to protect themselves, patients, as well as nurses and radiologists engaged in examinations from radiation exposure. To achieve this, all gastroenterologists must first understand and adhere to the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication. In particular, it is necessary to understand the three principles of radiation protection (Justification, Optimization, and Dose Limits), the As Low As Reasonably Achievable principle, and the Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) according to them. This review will mainly explain the three principles of radiation exposure protection, DRLs, and occupational radiological protection in interventional procedures while introducing related findings. Gastroenterologists must gain knowledge of radiation exposure protection and keep it updated., (© 2021 The Authors. Digestive Endoscopy published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Objectives: The transpapillary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP-D) cannot be performed without fluoroscopy, and there are many situations in which fluoroscopy is required even in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage (EUS-D). Previous studies have compared the efficacy, but not the radiation exposure of EUS-D and ERCP-D. While radiation exposure in ERCP-D has been previously evaluated, there is a paucity of information regarding radiation doses in EUS-D. This study aimed to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D., Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-D and ERCP-D between October 2017 and March 2019. The air kerma (AK, mGy), kerma-area product (KAP, Gycm 2 ), fluoroscopy time (FT, min), and procedure time (PT, min) were assessed. The invasive probability weighting method was used to qualify the comparisons., Results: We enrolled 372 and 105 patients who underwent ERCP-D and EUS-D, respectively. The mean AK, KAP, and FT in the EUS-D group were higher by 53%, 28%, and 27%, respectively, than those in the ERCP-D group, whereas PT was shorter by approximately 11% (AK, 135.0 vs. 88.4; KAP, 28.1 vs. 21.9; FT, 20.4 vs. 16.0; PT, 38.7 vs. 43.5). The sub-analysis limited to biliary drainage cases showed the same trend (AK, 128.3 vs. 90.9; KAP, 27.0 vs. 22.2; FT, 16.4 vs. 16.1; PT, 32.5 vs. 44.4)., Conclusions: This is the first study to assess radiation exposure in EUS-D compared with that in ERCP-D. Radiation exposure was significantly higher in EUS-D than in ERCP-D, despite the shorter procedure time., (© 2021 The Authors. Digestive Endoscopy published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Introduction: The global needs for a reduction in radiation exposure (RE) are increasing. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a significant fluoroscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal field. However, the actual RE in ERCP and its annual trend are still unclear. Therefore, we examined the yearly trend of RE in ERCP., Methods: This retrospective, single-center cohort study included consecutive cases of ERCP from September 2012 to June 2019. We measured the air kerma (AK, mGy), dose area product (DAP, Gycm2), and fluoroscopy time (FT, min). We also evaluated the annual trend of the RE before and after the fluoroscopy device update., Results: In total, 2,174 patients receiving ERCP were enrolled. Among these, the mean age was 74.3 years, and 913 patients were women (42.0%). The median/third quartile values of AK (mGy), DAP (Gycm2), and FT (min) were 109/234 mGy, 13.3/25.8 Gycm2, and 18.2/27.7 minutes. The annual AK, DAP, and FT from 2012 to 2019 were 138, 207, 173, 177, 106, 71.0, 45.0, and 33.3 mGy; 23, 21.4, 19, 18.3, 11.9, 9.0, 6.8, and 6.4 Gycm2; and 12.5, 12.1, 9.7, 9.8, 8.2, 10.8, 9.4, and 10.3 minutes, respectively. The corresponding values before and after the update in July 2016 were 177 and 52 mGy (P < 0.0001), 19.2 and 7.6 Gycm2 (P < 0.0001), and 10.2, and 9.9 minutes (P = 0.05), respectively., Discussion: The RE from ERCP tended to decrease every year, especially after fluoroscopy device updates., (Copyright © 2020 by The Authors(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Introduction: Recently, the use of various endoscopic procedures under X-ray fluoroscopic guidance, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), enteral endoscopy and stenting, has been rapidly increasing because of the minimally invasive nature of these procedures compared with that of surgical intervention. With the spread of CT and fluoroscopic interventions, including endoscopic procedures under X-ray guidance, high levels of radiation exposure (RE) from medical imaging have led to major concerns throughout society. However, information about RE related to these image-guided procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy is scarce, and the RE reference levels have not been established. The aim of this study is to prospectively collect the actual RE dose and to help establish diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in the field of gastroenterology in Japan., Methods and Analysis: This is a multicentre, prospective observational study that is being conducted to collect the actual RE from treatments and diagnostic procedures, including ERCP, interventional EUS, balloon-assisted enteroscopy, enteral metallic stent placement and enteral tube placement. We will measure the total fluoroscopy time (min), the total dose-area product (Gycm 2 ) and air-kerma (mGy) of those procedures. Because we are collecting the actual RE data and identifying the influential factors through a prospective, nationwide design, this study will provide guidance regarding the DRLs of ERCP, interventional EUS, balloon-assisted enteroscopy, enteral metallic stent placement and enteral tube placement., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Toyonaka Municipal Hospital (25 April 2019). The need for informed consent will be waived via the opt-out method of each hospital website., Trial Registration Number: The UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000036525., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Recently, an astatine-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligand ([211At]PSMA-5) has been developed for the targeted alpha therapy of patients with prostate cancer. This manual delineates its physicochemical characteristics to assist healthcare professionals in understanding the α-ray-emitting drug of [211At]PSMA-5 when administered to patients. The safety considerations regarding the handling and use of this drug in clinical trials are outlined, based on the proper usage manual of previous studies. The dose limits, as defined by the guidelines of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are assessed for patients' caregivers and the general public. According to the calculations provided in this manual, clinical trials involving [211At]PSMA-5 can be safely conducted for these populations even if patients are released after its administration. Moreover, this manual provides comprehensive guidance on the handling of [211At]PSMA-5 for healthcare facilities, and compiles a list of precautionary measures to be distributed among patients and their caregivers. While this manual was created by a research team supported by Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan and approved by Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine, its applicability extends to healthcare providers in other countries. This manual aims to facilitate conducting clinical trials using [211At]PSMA-5 in patients with prostate cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fluoroscopy forms an essential part of endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) and hepaticogastrostomy with antegrade stenting (EUS-HGAS). To date, no study has assessed and compared radiation exposure between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study aimed to compare the radiation exposure parameters between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This retrospective single-center cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent EUS-HGS or EUS-HGAS from October 2017 to March 2019. The air kerma (AK: mGy), kerma–area product (KAP: Gycm2), fluoroscopy time (FT: min), and procedure time (PT: min) were assessed and compared between the two procedures. Altogether, 45 and 24 patients underwent EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS, respectively. The median AK, KAP, FT, and PT were higher in the EUS-HGAS group than in the EUS-HGS group. A comparison revealed no difference in the technical success rate, complications rate, adverse event occurrence rate, and re-intervention rate between both procedures. This is the first report in which radiation exposure was used as a comparative parameter between EUS-HGS and EUS-HGAS. This study revealed that radiation exposure is significantly higher in EUS-HGAS than in EUS-HGS. Increased awareness on radiation exposure is warranted among gastroenterologists so that they choose the procedure with lower radiation exposure in cases where both procedures are indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although many interventions involving radiation exposure have been replaced to endoscopic procedure in the gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary fields, there remains no alternative for enteroscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), which requires the use of radiation. In this review, we discuss the radiation doses and protective measures of endoscopic procedures, especially for ERCP. For the patient radiation dose, the average dose area product for diagnostic ERCP was 14–26 Gy.cm², while it increased to as high as 67–89 Gy.cm² for therapeutic ERCP. The corresponding entrance skin doses for diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP were 90 and 250 mGy, respectively. The mean effective doses were 3– 6 mSv for diagnostic ERCP and 12–20 mSv for therapeutic ERCP. For the occupational radiation dose, the typical doses were 94 μGy and 75 μGy for the eye and neck, respectively. However, with an over-couch-type X-ray unit, the eye and neck doses reached as high as 550 and 450 μGy, with maximal doses of up to 2.8 and 2.4 mGy/procedure, respectively. A protective lead shield was effective for an over couch X-ray tube unit. It lowered scattered radiation by up to 89.1% in a phantom study. In actual measurements, the radiation exposure of the endoscopist closest to the unit was reduced to approximately 12%. In conclusion, there is a clear need for raising awareness among medical personnel involved endoscopic procedures to minimise radiation risks to both the patients and staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Positron emission tomography (PET–CT) is an essential imaging modality for the management of various diseases. Increasing numbers of PET–CT examinations are carried out across the world and deliver benefits to patients; however, there are concerns about the cumulative radiation doses from these examinations in patients. Compared to the radiation exposure delivered by CT, there have been few reports on the frequency of patients with a cumulative effective radiation dose of ≥100 mSv from repeated PET–CT examinations. The emerging dose tracking system facilitates surveys on patient cumulative doses by PET–CT because it can easily wrap up exposure doses of PET radiopharmaceuticals and CT. Regardless of the use of a dose tracking system, implementation of justification for PET–CT examinations and utilisation of dose reduction measures are key issues in coping with the cumulative dose in patients. Despite all the advantages of PET/MRI such as eliminating radiation exposure from CT and providing good tissue contrast in MRI, it is expensive and cannot be introduced at every facility; thus, it is still necessary to utilise PET–CT with radiation reduction measures in most clinical situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The α-emitting radionuclide radium-223 (223Ra) is widely used for the treatment of bone metastasis in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, 223Ra decays into radon-219 (219Rn) which is a noble-gas isotope, and 219Rn may escape from patients treated with 223Ra via their respiration. In this study, we quantified the amount of 219Rn contained in the breath of patients treated with 223Ra to estimate its effect on the internal exposure dose of caregivers. Methods: A total of 12 breath samples were collected using a breath collection bag from a total of six patients treated with 223RaCl2. Approximately 300 mL of exhaled breath was collected in a breath bag at 1 min and at 5 min after the start of 223RaCl2 administration. The contents of each bag were measured using an HPGe detector, and the amount of 219Rn was quantified based on the detection of the γ peak of 211Bi, which is a descendant nuclide of 219Rn, persisting in the breath bag. The effective dose to caregivers arising from the inhalation of 219Rn was estimated by referring to the scenario for the calculation of release criteria established for 131I therapy in Japan. Results: A small peak for the 351-keV γ ray of 211Bi originating from the exhalation of 219Rn was observed. Using the observed γ peak of 211Bi, the average amounts of 219Rn per unit breath volume at 1 min and 5 min after the start of 223RaCl2 administration were calculated as 90 ± 56 Bq/mL and 28 ± 9 Bq/mL, respectively. The effective dose of 219Rn to caregivers was estimated to be 3.5 μSv per injection. Conclusions: The amount of 219Rn in the exhaled breath of patients treated with 223RaCl2 was quantitatively calculated using breath collection bags. The internal radiation exposure of caregivers from 219Rn in the exhaled breath of patients treated with 223RaCl2 is relatively small. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The α-emitting radionuclide radium-223 (223Ra) is widely used for the treatment of bone metastasis in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, 223Ra decays into radon-219 (219Rn) which is a noble-gas isotope, and 219Rn may escape from patients treated with 223Ra via their respiration. In this study, we quantified the amount of 219Rn contained in the breath of patients treated with 223Ra to estimate its effect on the internal exposure dose of caregivers. Methods: A total of 12 breath samples were collected using a breath collection bag from a total of six patients treated with 223RaCl2. Approximately 300 mL of exhaled breath was collected in a breath bag at 1 min and at 5 min after the start of 223RaCl2 administration. The contents of each bag were measured using an HPGe detector, and the amount of 219Rn was quantified based on the detection of the γ peak of 211Bi, which is a descendant nuclide of 219Rn, persisting in the breath bag. The effective dose to caregivers arising from the inhalation of 219Rn was estimated by referring to the scenario for the calculation of release criteria established for 131I therapy in Japan. Results: A small peak for the 351-keV γ ray of 211Bi originating from the exhalation of 219Rn was observed. Using the observed γ peak of 211Bi, the average amounts of 219Rn per unit breath volume at 1 min and 5 min after the start of 223RaCl2 administration were calculated as 90 ± 56 Bq/mL and 28 ± 9 Bq/mL, respectively. The effective dose of 219Rn to caregivers was estimated to be 3.5 μSv per injection. Conclusions: The amount of 219Rn in the exhaled breath of patients treated with 223RaCl2 was quantitatively calculated using breath collection bags. The internal radiation exposure of caregivers from 219Rn in the exhaled breath of patients treated with 223RaCl2 is relatively small. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]