ABSTRACT
Radiation dose to the eye lens is a crucial issue for interventional cardiologists (ICs) who are exposed during the procedures they perform. This paper presents a retrospective assessment of the cumulative eye lens doses of ICs enrolled in the O'CLOC study for Occupational Cataracts and Lens Opacities in interventional Cardiology. Information on the workload in the catheterisation laboratory, radiation protection equipment, eye lens dose per procedure and dose reduction factors associated with eye-protective equipment were considered. For the 129 ICs at an average age of 51 who had worked for an average period of 22 years, the estimated cumulative eye lens dose ranged from 25 mSv to more than 1600 mSv; the mean ± SD was 423 ± 359 mSv. After several years of practice, without eye protection, ICs may exceed the new ICRP lifetime eye dose threshold of 500 mSv and be at high risk of developing early radiation-induced cataracts. Radiation protection equipment can reduce these doses and should be used routinely.
Subject(s)
Cataract/etiology , Lens, Crystalline/radiation effects , Occupational Exposure , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control , Radiation Protection/methods , Adult , Aged , Cardiology/methods , Female , France , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Occupational Health , Physicians , Protective Devices , Radiation Dosage , Radiology, Interventional/methods , Radiometry , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
This paper describes the results of the simulation of a radiophotoluminescent (RPL) dosemeter with the Monte Carlo transport code MCNPX. The aim of this study is to calculate the response with MCNPX of the RPL dosemeter in terms of equivalent doses H(p) (0.07) and H(p)(10) using X-ray photon radiation qualities N series, together with S-Cs and S-Co nuclide radiation qualities, specified in ISO 4037-1. After comparison with reference values versus experimental results, the deviation of the theoretical responses of the RPL dosemeter proved to be lower than 5 % for reference values and lower than 10 % for experimental results. This good correlation validates the model over the energy range studied.
Subject(s)
Radiation Monitoring/instrumentation , Radiation Protection/instrumentation , Thermoluminescent Dosimetry/instrumentation , Cesium Radioisotopes/analysis , Cobalt Radioisotopes/analysis , Computer Simulation , Equipment Design , Glass , Humans , Materials Testing , Models, Statistical , Monte Carlo Method , Photons , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Monitoring/methods , Radiation Protection/methods , Reference Values , Thermoluminescent Dosimetry/methodsABSTRACT
The use of active personal dosemeters (APD) in interventional radiology was evaluated by Working Group 9 (Radiation protection dosimetry of medical staff) of the CONRAD project, which is a Coordination Action supported by the European Commission within its sixth Framework Programme. Interventional radiology procedures can be very complex and they can lead to relatively high doses to personnel who stand close to the primary radiation field and are mostly exposed to radiation scattered by the patient. For the adequate dosimetry of the scattered photons, APDs must be able to respond to low-energy [10-100 keV] and pulsed radiation with relatively high instantaneous dose rates. An intercomparison of five APD models deemed suitable for application in interventional radiology was organised in March 2007. The intercomparison used pulsed and continuous radiation beams, at CEA-LIST (Saclay, France) and IRSN (Fontenay-aux-Roses, France), respectively. A specific configuration, close to the clinical practice, was considered. The reference dose, in terms of Hp(10), was derived from air kerma measurements and from the measured and calculated energy distributions of the scattered radiation field. Additional Monte Carlo calculations were performed to investigate the energy spectra for different experimental conditions of the intercomparison. The results of this intercomparison are presented in this work and indicate which APDs are able to provide a correct response when used in the specific low-energy spectra and dose rates of pulsed X-rays encountered in interventional radiology.