Effectiveness of staff radiation protection devices for interventional cardiology procedures.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of currently available radioprotective (RP) devices in reducing the dose to interventional cardiology staff, especially to the eye lens and brain. METHODS: The performances of five RP devices (masks, caps, patient drapes, staff lead and lead-free aprons and Zero-Gravity (ZG) suspended radiation protection system) were assessed by means of Monte Carlo (MC) simulations. A geometry representative of an interventional cardiology setup was modelled and several configurations, including beam projections and staff distance from the source, were investigated. In addition, measurements on phantoms were performed for masks and drapes. RESULTS: An average dose reduction of 65% and 25% to the eyes and the brain respectively was obtained for the masks by MC simulations but a strong influence of the design was observed. The cap effectiveness for the brain ranges on average between 13% and 37%. Nevertheless, it was shown that only some upper parts of the brain were protected. There was no significant difference between the effectiveness of lead and lead-free aprons. Of all the devices, the ZG system offered the highest protection to the brain and eye lens and a protection level comparable to the apron for the organs normally covered. CONCLUSION: All investigated devices showed potential for dose reduction to specific organs. However, for masks, caps and drapes, it strongly depends on the design, exposure conditions and staff position. Therefore, for a clinical use, it is recommended to evaluate their effectiveness in the planned conditions of use.

An investigation into potential improvements in the design of lead glasses for protecting the eyes of interventional cardiologists.

The lens of the eye can be damaged by ionising radiation, so individuals whose eyes are exposed to radiation during their work may need to protect their eyes from exposure. Lead glasses are widely available, but there are questions about their efficiency in providing eye protection. In this study, Monte Carlo simulations are used to assess the efficiency of lead glasses in protecting the sensitive volume of the eye lens. Two designs currently available for interventional cardiologists are a wraparound (WA) style and ones with flat frontal lenses with side shielding. These designs were considered together with four modifications that would impact upon their efficiency: changing the lead equivalent thickness, adding lead to the frames, elongating the frontal lenses, and adding a closing shield to the bottom rim. For the eye closest to the source, standard models of lead glasses only decrease the radiation reaching the most sensitive region of the eye lens by 22% or less. Varying the lead thickness between 0.4 mm and 0.75 mm had little influence on the protection provided in the simulation of clinical use, neither did adding lead to the frames. Improved shielding was obtained by elongating the frontal lens, which could reduce radiation reaching the eye lens by up to 76%. Glasses with lenses that had a rim at the base, extending towards the face of the user, also provided better shielding than current models, decreasing the dose by up to 80%. In conclusion, elongating the frontal lens of lead glasses, especially of the WA design, could provide a three-fold increase in shielding efficiency and this is still valid for lenses with 0.4 mm lead equivalence.

Conversion factor for size specific dose estimation of head CT scans based on age, for individuals from 0 up to 18 years old.

Assessing the radiation doses received by patients in computed tomography is still challenging. To overcome this, the American Association of Physicists in Medicine has introduced the concept of the size specific dose estimate (SSDE). However, the calculation of SSDE for head CT scans requires the knowledge of attenuation characteristics of the volume scanned, making its implementation in the daily clinical workflow cumbersome. In this study, we defined conversion coefficients from CTDIvol,16cmto SSDE for head CT scans based solely on the age of the patient. Using the head circumference-for-age from the child growth standards of the World Health Organization (WHO), the effective diameter-for-age was calculated for male and female individuals from 0 to 60 months-old. The effective diameter was converted into a water equivalent diameter-for-age, using a correlation established from the measurements of both quantities in 295 exams of male and female patients, from 0 to 18 years-old. WHO-estimated water equivalent diameter-for-age was validated against the measured water equivalent diameter-for-age. The head circumference-for-age from WHO was extrapolated for male and females individuals up to 18 years-old and their respective water equivalent diameter were estimated. Finally, the SSDE was calculated for all the CT head scans performed in a 9-years period in patients aged from 0 to 18 years old. Typical values of CTDIvol,16cmand DLP were also defined. SSDE varied from 0.80 up to 1.16 of the CTDIvol,16cm, depending on sex and age of the patient. WHO-estimated water equivalent diameter-for-age differed less than 20% from the measured water equivalent diameter-for-age. Typical values of SSDE varied from 28.5 up to 38.9 mGy, while typical values ranged from 30.9 up to 47.6 mGy for the CTDIvol,16cmand from 417.6 up to 861.1 mGy*cm for the DLP. SSDE can be directly calculated for head CT scans once the age of the patient is known.

A study of the underestimation of eye lens dose with current eye dosemeters for interventional clinicians wearing lead glasses.

The reduction in the occupational dose limit of the eye lens has created the need for optimising eye protection and dose assessment, in particular for interventional clinicians. Lead glasses are one of the protection tools for shielding the eyes, but assessing the eye lens dose when these are in place remains challenging. In this study, we evaluated the impact of the position of H p (3) dosemeters on the estimated eye lens dose when lead glasses are used in interventional settings. Using the Monte Carlo method (MCNPX), an interventional cardiology setup was simulated for two models of lead glasses, five beam projections and two patient access routes. H p (3) dosemeters were placed at several positions on the operator and the obtained dose was compared to the dose to the sensitive part of the eye lens (H lens). Furthermore, to reproduce an experimental setup, a reference dosemeter, H p (3)ref, was placed on the surface of the eye. The dose measured by H p (3)ref was, on average, only 60% of H lens. Dosemeters placed on the glasses, under their shielding, underestimated H lens for all parameters considered, by from 10% up to 90%. Conversely, dosemeters placed on the head or on the glasses, over their shielding, overestimated H lens, on average, up to 60%. The presence or lack of side shielding in lead glasses affected mostly dosemeters placed on the forehead, at the left side. Results suggest that both use of a correction factor of 0.5 to account for the presence of lead glasses in doses measured outside their shielding and placing an eye lens dosemeter immediately beneath the lenses of lead glasses may lead to the underestimation of the eye lens dose. Most suitable positions for eye lens dose assessment were on the skin, unshielded by the glasses or close to the eye, with no correction to the dose measured.

Effect of protective devices on the radiation dose received by the brains of interventional cardiologists.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ceiling suspended screens, lead glasses and lead caps in reducing radiation doses to the brains of interventional cardiologists. METHODS AND RESULTS: Interventional procedures where the thorax of the patient is irradiated with different beam projections were modelled. The dose reduction in the white matter and hippocampus of the Zubal head phantom was studied for two sizes of ceiling suspended screens, two types of lead glasses and lead caps of surgical and hood models, which cover different regions of the head. Ceiling screens were the most effective, reducing the dose to brain tissue by 74% or even as much as 94%. The dose reduction provided by lead glasses varies between 10% and 17%. For the lead caps, it strongly depends on the model, varying from 6% (surgical) up to 68% (hood that also covered lower parts of the head). CONCLUSIONS: The dose to the brain can be reduced by using appropriate radiation protection devices. This study has shown that lead caps are less protective than previously described and that the best protection is given by ceiling suspended screens, which are widely available in interventional theatres.