RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the occupational radiation exposure of medical workers between general hospitals and university hospitals. METHODS: Radiation exposure data from three hospitals in Hiroshima city, including one university hospital and two general hospitals, were collected using personal dosimeters. Monthly radiation doses were analyzed, and the annual sum of radiation exposure dose was calculated for 538 subjects in general hospitals and 1224 subjects in the university hospital. To assess the impact of locality, additional data from Nagasaki University Hospital and Fukushima Medical University Hospital were included for comparative analysis. Professional affiliations, such as doctors, nurses, and radiological technologists, were considered in the evaluation. RESULTS: The study revealed slight but significant differences in radiation doses between general and university hospitals. In general hospitals, except for radiological technologists, a slightly higher radiation dose was observed compared to university hospitals. Despite the annual increase in the use of medical radiation, the majority of hospital workers in both settings adhered to safety guidelines, with occupational radiation exposure remaining below the limit of detection (LOD). Workers who involved in fluoroscopic procedure, whether at university or general hospitals, had higher radiation doses than those who did not. CONCLUSION: The study's primary conclusion is that workers in general hospitals experience a slight but significantly higher radiation dose and a lower percentage below the LOD compared to university hospitals. The observed difference is attributed to the greater workload at general hospitals than at university hospitals, and also may be due to the different nature of university hospital and general hospital. University hospitals, characterized by greater academic orientation, tend to benefit from comprehensive support systems, specialized expertise, and advanced technology, leading to more structured and regulated radiation control. These findings provide a basis for targeted interventions, improved safety protocols.
RESUMO
Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a standard treatment for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, submucosal or lymphovascular invasion increases the risk of lymph node metastasis. Although 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) parameters are associated with prognosis in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, the utility of FDG PET/CT in diagnosing superficial esophageal carcinoma remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the association between FDG PET/CT parameters and histopathological findings in superficial esophageal carcinoma. Fifty-three patients with superficial esophageal cancer who underwent FDG PET/CT scans before undergoing interventions were retrospectively analyzed. The maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume, and total lesion glycolysis were significantly higher in the cases with submucosal invasion (T1b) compared with those confined to the muscularis mucosa (T1a). In contrast, classification of intrapapillary capillary loops patterns with magnifying endoscopy did not yield statistical differences between T1a and T1b. Multivariable analysis revealed that SUVmax was the only independent predictor of submucosal and lymphovascular invasion. This study demonstrated that SUVmax may be useful in predicting submucosal and lymphovascular invasion. Thus, the value of SUVmax may guide clinical decision-making in superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.