Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 52
Filter
1.
J Radiol Prot ; 2024 Sep 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39265581

ABSTRACT

Occupational radiation exposure to the eye lens of medical staff during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) should be kept low so as not to exceed annual dose limits. Dose should be low to avoid tissue reactions and minimizing stochastic effects. It is known that the head and neck of the staff are exposed to more scattered radiation in an over-couch tube system than in a C-arm system (under-couch tube). However, this is only true when radiation-shielding curtains are not used. This study aimed to compare the protection radiation to the occupationally exposed worker between a lead curtain mounted on a C-arm system and an ERCP-specific lead curtain mounted on an over-couch tube system. A phantom study simulating a typical setting for ERCP procedures was conducted, and the scattered radiation dose at four staff positions were measured. It was found that scattered radiation doses were higher in the C-arm with a lead curtain than in the over-couch tube with an ERCP-specific lead curtain at all positions measured in this study. It was concluded that the over-couch tube system with an ERCP-specific lead curtain would reduce the staff eye dose by less than one-third compared to the C-arm system with a lead curtain. For the C-arm system, it is necessary to consider more effective radiation protection measures for the upper body of the staff, such as a ceiling-suspended lead screen or another novel shielding that do not interfere with procedures.

2.
J Radiol Prot ; 44(2)2024 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38701771

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Eye Protective Devices , Eyeglasses , Occupational Exposure , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Protection , Humans , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Phantoms, Imaging , Eye/radiation effects , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control
3.
J Radiat Res ; 65(4): 450-458, 2024 Jul 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38818635

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Eye Protective Devices , Lens, Crystalline , Occupational Exposure , Phantoms, Imaging , Radiation Dosage , Scattering, Radiation , Humans , Lens, Crystalline/radiation effects , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Radiometry , Radiation Protection , Radiation Dosimeters , Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation
5.
J Radiol Prot ; 43(4)2023 11 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37939385

ABSTRACT

The diagnostic reference level (DRL) is an effective tool for optimising protection in medical exposures to patients. However regarding air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (Ka,r), one of the DRL quantities for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), manufacturers use a variety of the International Electrotechnical Commission and their own specific definitions of the reference point. The research question for this study was whetherKa,ris appropriate as a DRL quantity for ERCP. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference betweenKa,rand air kerma incident on the patient's skin surface (Ka,e) at the different height of the patient couch for a C-arm system. Fluoroscopy and radiography were performed using a C-arm system (Ultimax-i, Canon Medical Systems, Japan) and a over-couch tube system (CUREVISTA Open, Fujifilm Healthcare, Japan).Ka,ewas measured by an ion chamber placed on the entrance surface of the phantom. Kerma-area product (PKA) andKa,rwere measured by a built-inPKAmeter and displayed on the fluoroscopy system.Ka,edecreased whileKa,rincreased as the patient couch moved away from the focal spot. The uncertainty of theKa,e/Ka,rratio due to the different height of the patient couch was estimated to be 75%-94%.Ka,rmay not accurately representKa,e.PKAwas a robust DRL quantity that was independent of the patient couch height. We cautioned against optimising patient doses in ERCP with DRLs set in terms ofKa,rwithout considering the patient couch height of the C-arm system. Therefore, we recommend thatKa,ris an inappropriate DRL quantity in ERCP using the C-arm system.


Subject(s)
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Diagnostic Reference Levels , Humans , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde/adverse effects , Radiation Dosage , Fluoroscopy , Radiography
6.
J Radiol Prot ; 43(3)2023 09 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37696261

ABSTRACT

Children are sensitive to radiation; therefore, it is necessary to reduce radiation dose as much as possible in pediatric patients. In addition, it is crucial to investigate the optimal imaging conditions as they considerably affect the radiation dose. In this study, we investigated the effect of different imaging conditions on image quality and optimized the imaging conditions for dental cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) examinations to diagnose ectopic eruptions and impacted teeth in children. To achieve our aims, we evaluated radiation doses and subjective and objective image quality. The CBCT scans were performed using 3D Accuitomo F17. All combinations of a tube voltage (90 kV), tube currents (1, 2, 3 mA), fields of view (FOVs) (4 × 4, 6 × 6 cm), and rotation angles (360°, 180°) were used. Dose-area product values were measured. SedentexCT IQ cylindrical phantom was used to physically evaluate the image quality. We used the modulation transfer function as an index of resolution, the noise power spectrum as an index of noise characteristics, and the system performance function as an overall evaluation index of the image. Five dentists visually evaluated the images from the head-neck phantom. The results showed that the image quality tended to worsen, and scores for visual evaluation decreased as tube currents, FOVs and rotation angles decreased. In particular, image noise negatively affected the delineation of the periodontal ligament space. The optimal imaging conditions were 90 kV, 2 mA, 4 × 4 cm FOV and 180° rotation. These results suggest that CBCT radiation doses can be significantly reduced by optimizing the imaging conditions.


Subject(s)
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography , Head , Humans , Child , Phantoms, Imaging , Neck , Radiation Dosage
7.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 13(18)2023 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37761370

ABSTRACT

Although interventional radiology (IVR) is preferred over surgical procedures because it is less invasive, it results in increased radiation exposure due to long fluoroscopy times and the need for frequent imaging. Nurses engaged in cardiac IVR receive the highest lens radiation doses among medical workers, after physicians. Hence, it is important to measure the lens exposure of IVR nurses accurately. Very few studies have evaluated IVR nurse lens doses using direct dosimeters. This study was conducted using direct eye dosimeters to determine the occupational eye dose of nurses engaged in cardiac IVR, and to identify simple and accurate methods to evaluate the lens dose received by nurses. Over 6 months, in a catheterization laboratory, we measured the occupational dose to the eyes (3 mm dose equivalent) and neck (0.07 mm dose equivalent) of nurses on the right and left sides. We investigated the relationship between lens and neck doses, and found a significant correlation. Hence, it may be possible to estimate the lens dose from the neck badge dose. We also evaluated the appropriate position (left or right) of eye dosimeters for IVR nurses. Although there was little difference between the mean doses to the right and left eyes, that to the right eye was slightly higher. In addition, we investigated whether it is possible to estimate doses received by IVR nurses from patient dose parameters. There were significant correlations between the measured doses to the neck and lens, and the patient dose parameters (fluoroscopy time and air kerma), implying that these parameters could be used to estimate the lens dose. However, it may be difficult to determine the lens dose of IVR nurses accurately from neck badges or patient dose parameters because of variation in the behaviors of nurses and the procedure type. Therefore, neck doses and patient dose parameters do not correlate well with the radiation eye doses of individual IVR nurses measured by personal eye dosimeters. For IVR nurses with higher eye doses, more accurate measurement of the radiation doses is required. We recommend that a lens dosimeter be worn near the eyes to measure the lens dose to IVR nurses accurately, especially those exposed to relatively high doses.

8.
Bioengineering (Basel) ; 10(2)2023 Feb 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36829753

ABSTRACT

Mobile radiography allows for the diagnostic imaging of patients who cannot move to the X-ray examination room. Therefore, mobile X-ray equipment is useful for patients who have difficulty with movement. However, staff are exposed to scattered radiation from the patient, and they can receive potentially harmful radiation doses during radiography. We estimated occupational exposure during mobile radiography using phantom measurements. Scattered radiation distribution during mobile radiography was investigated using a radiation survey meter. The efficacy of radiation-reducing methods for mobile radiography was also evaluated. The dose decreased as the distance from the X-ray center increased. When the distance was more than 150 cm, the dose decreased to less than 1 µSv. It is extremely important for radiological technologists (RTs) to maintain a sufficient distance from the patient to reduce radiation exposure. The spatial dose at eye-lens height increases when the bed height is high, and when the RT is short in stature and abdominal imaging is performed. Maintaining sufficient distance from the patient is also particularly effective in limiting radiation exposure of the eye lens. Our results suggest that the doses of radiation received by staff during mobile radiography are not significant when appropriate radiation protection is used. To reduce exposure, it is important to maintain a sufficient distance from the patient. Therefore, RTs should bear this is mind during mobile radiography.

9.
Sensors (Basel) ; 23(1)2023 Jan 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36617110

ABSTRACT

In 2011, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommended a significant reduction in the lens-equivalent radiation dose limit, thus from an average of 150 to 20 mSv/year over 5 years. In recent years, the occupational dose has been rising with the increased sophistication of interventional radiology (IVR); management of IVR staff radiation doses has become more important, making real-time radiation monitoring of such staff desirable. Recently, the i3 real-time occupational exposure monitoring system (based on RaySafeTM) has replaced the conventional i2 system. Here, we compared the i2 and i3 systems in terms of sensitivity (batch uniformity), tube-voltage dependency, dose linearity, dose-rate dependency, and angle dependency. The sensitivity difference (batch uniformity) was approximately 5%, and the tube-voltage dependency was <±20% between 50 and 110 kV. Dose linearity was good (R2 = 1.00); a slight dose-rate dependency (~20%) was evident at very high dose rates (250 mGy/h). The i3 dosimeter showed better performance for the lower radiation detection limit compared with the i2 system. The horizontal and vertical angle dependencies of i3 were superior to those of i2. Thus, i3 sensitivity was higher over a wider angle range compared with i2, aiding the measurement of scattered radiation. Unlike the i2 sensor, the influence of backscattered radiation (i.e., radiation from an angle of 180°) was negligible. Therefore, the i3 system may be more appropriate in areas affected by backscatter. In the future, i3 will facilitate real-time dosimetry and dose management during IVR and other applications.


Subject(s)
Radiation Protection , Radiology, Interventional , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Dosimeters , Radiometry
10.
Radiol Phys Technol ; 15(1): 54-62, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35067903

ABSTRACT

Occupational eye dose monitoring during interventional radiology and interventional cardiology is important to avoid radiation-induced cataracts. The aim of this study was to assess the eye dose correlation with neck dose and patient-related quantities for interventional cardiology physicians and nurses. The originality of this study lies in obtaining correlations between the location of the dosimeter and eye dose radiation readings among different procedures and practitioners. The doses were measured for each procedure (18 procedures of coronary angiography and 16 procedures of percutaneous coronary intervention) using an active personal dosimeter. The eye dose for physicians was not correlated with the neck dose. The eye dose for nurses had a good correlation with the neck dose during both coronary angiography (R2 = 0.91) and percutaneous coronary intervention (R2 = 0.93). Kerma-area product values may be used for a rough estimation of the eye dose for physicians during routine coronary angiography procedures (R2 = 0.76). For nurses, the neck dose is a good proxy for the eye dose during coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention procedures.


Subject(s)
Cardiology , Lens, Crystalline , Occupational Exposure , Radiation Protection , Humans , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Protection/methods , Radiology, Interventional
11.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 11(9)2021 Sep 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34573955

ABSTRACT

Radiation protection/evaluation during interventional radiology (IVR) poses a very important problem. Although IVR physicians should wear protective aprons, the IVR physician may not tolerate wearing one for long procedures because protective aprons are generally heavy. In fact, orthopedic problems are increasingly reported in IVR physicians due to the strain of wearing heavy protective aprons during IVR. In recent years, non-Pb protective aprons (lighter weight, composite materials) have been developed. Although non-Pb protective aprons are more expensive than Pb protective aprons, the former aprons weigh less. However, whether the protective performance of non-Pb aprons is sufficient in the IVR clinical setting is unclear. This study compared the ability of non-Pb and Pb protective aprons (0.25- and 0.35-mm Pb-equivalents) to protect physicians from scatter radiation in a clinical setting (IVR, cardiac catheterizations, including percutaneous coronary intervention) using an electric personal dosimeter (EPD). For radiation measurements, physicians wore EPDs: One inside a personal protective apron at the chest, and one outside a personal protective apron at the chest. Physician comfort levels in each apron during procedures were also evaluated. As a result, performance (both the shielding effect (98.5%) and comfort (good)) of the non-Pb 0.35-mm-Pb-equivalent protective apron was good in the clinical setting. The radiation-shielding effects of the non-Pb 0.35-mm and Pb 0.35-mm-Pb-equivalent protective aprons were very similar. Therefore, non-Pb 0.35-mm Pb-equivalent protective aprons may be more suitable for providing radiation protection for IVR physicians because the shielding effect and comfort are both good in the clinical IVR setting. As non-Pb protective aprons are nontoxic and weigh less than Pb protective aprons, non-Pb protective aprons will be the preferred type for radiation protection of IVR staff, especially physicians.

12.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 10(10)2020 Oct 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33086733

ABSTRACT

In recent years, endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysms has attracted considerable attention as a promising alternative to traditional surgery. Hybrid operating room systems (HORSs) are increasingly being used to perform endovascular procedures. The clinical benefits of endovascular treatments using HORSs are very clear, and these procedures are increasing in number. In procedures such as thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), wires and catheters are used to deliver and deploy the stent graft in the thoracic/abdominal aorta under fluoroscopic control, including DSA. Thus, the radiation dose to the patient is an important issue. We determined radiation dose indicators (the dose-area product (DAP) and air karma (AK) parameters) associated with endovascular treatments (EVAR and TEVAR) using a HORS. As a result, the mean ± standard deviation (SD) DAPs of TEVAR and EVAR were 323.7 ± 161.0 and 371.3 ± 186.0 Gy x cm2, respectively. The mean ± SD AKs of TEVAR and EVAR were 0.92 ± 0.44 and 1.11 ± 0.54 Gy, respectively. The mean ± SD fluoroscopy times of TEVAR and EVAR were 13.4 ± 7.1 and 23.2 ± 11.7 min, respectively. Patient radiation dose results in this study of endovascular treatments using HORSs showed no deterministic radiation effects, such as skin injuries. However, radiation exposure during TEVAR and EVAR cannot be ignored. The radiation dose should be evaluated in HORSs during endovascular treatments. Reducing/optimizing the radiation dose to the patient in HORSs is important.

13.
J Radiat Res ; 61(5): 691-696, 2020 Sep 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32657327

ABSTRACT

Although the clinical value of fluoroscopically guided respiratory endoscopy (bronchoscopy) is clear, there have been very few studies on the radiation dose received by staff during fluoroscopically guided bronchoscopy. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is suggesting reducing the occupational lens dose limit markedly from 150 to 20 mSv/year, averaged over defined periods of five years. The purpose of this study was to clarify the current occupational eye dose of bronchoscopy staff conducting fluoroscopically guided procedures. We measured the occupational eye doses (3-mm-dose equivalent, Hp(3)) of bronchoscopy staff (physicians and nurses) over a 6-month period. The eye doses of eight physicians and three nurses were recorded using a direct eye dosimeter, the DOSIRIS. We also estimated eye doses using personal dosimeters worn at the neck. The mean ± SD radiation eye doses (DOSIRIS) to physicians and nurses were 7.68 ± 5.27 and 2.41 ± 1.94 mSv/6 months, respectively. The new lens dose limit, 20 mSv/year, may be exceeded among bronchoscopy staff, especially physicians. The eye dose of bronchoscopy staff (both physicians and nurses) was underestimated when measured using a neck dosimeter. Hence, the occupational eye dose of bronchoscopy staff should be monitored. To reduce the occupational eye dose, we recommend that staff performing fluoroscopically guided bronchoscopy wear Pb glasses. correct evaluation of the lens dose [Hp(3)] using an eye dosimeter such as the DOSIRIS is necessary for bronchoscopy staff.


Subject(s)
Bronchoscopy , Eye/radiation effects , Fluoroscopy , Medical Staff , Radiation Protection , Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation , Humans , Neck/radiation effects , Nurses , Occupational Exposure , Physicians , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Exposure , Radiometry , X-Rays
14.
Radiol Phys Technol ; 13(3): 321-326, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32715378

ABSTRACT

Radiation exposure during interventional radiology (IR) procedures is a critical issue. We have developed a wireless real-time dosimeter for IR patients that use nontoxic phosphor (four sensors). We evaluated the basic performance parameters (such as dose linearity, batch uniformity, reproducibility, and wireless-communication conditions) of the developed system using an IR X-ray system. Further, we investigated the influence of noise from other medical equipment on our wireless real-time dosimeter in the IR X-ray room. Overall, our wireless system exhibited excellent performance in terms of uniformity, reproducibility, and linearity; moreover, the wireless communication performance was better. The developed system enabled real-time visualization of patient radiation dose, without noise contamination from other medical equipment. In addition, the wireless system can be easily installed in a location where the PC screen (display) can be readily viewed by the IR physician. Hence, we developed a wireless system that can display the patient radiation dose data in real time; the system performed satisfactorily upon application in radiation dosimetry. Therefore, our wireless system will facilitate the real-time monitoring/management of patient radiation dose during IR.


Subject(s)
Radiology, Interventional/instrumentation , Radiometry/instrumentation , Wireless Technology
15.
Sensors (Basel) ; 20(9)2020 May 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32403386

ABSTRACT

Radiation-related tissue injuries after medical radiation procedures, such as fluoroscopically guided intervention (FGI), have been reported in patients. Real-time monitoring of medical radiation exposure administered to patients during FGI is important to avoid such tissue injuries. In our previous study, we reported a novel (prototype) real-time radiation system for FGI. However, the prototype sensor indicated low sensitivity to radiation exposure from the side and back, although it had high-quality fundamental characteristics. Therefore, we developed a novel 4-channel sensor with modified shape and size than the previous sensor, and evaluated the basic performance (i.e., measured the energy, dose linearity, dose rate, and angular dependence) of the novel and previous sensors. Both sensors of our real-time dosimeter system demonstrated the low energy dependence, excellent dose linearity (R2 = 1.0000), and good dose rate dependence (i.e., within 5% statistical difference). Besides, the sensitivity of 0° ± 180° in the horizontal and vertical directions was almost 100% sensitivity for the new sensor, which significantly improved the angular dependence. Moreover, the novel dosimeter exerted less influence on X-ray images (fluoroscopy) than other sensors because of modifying a small shape and size. Therefore, the developed dosimeter system is expected to be useful for measuring the exposure of patients to radiation doses during FGI procedures.


Subject(s)
Radiation Dosage , Radiation Dosimeters , Radiation , Computer Systems , Fluoroscopy , Humans
16.
Radiol Phys Technol ; 11(4): 445-450, 2018 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30306465

ABSTRACT

Radiation dose management is important in interventional radiology (IR) procedures, such as percutaneous coronary intervention, to prevent radiation-induced injuries. Therefore, radiation dose should be monitored in real time during IR. This study evaluated the fundamental characteristics of a novel real-time skin dosimeter (RTSD) developed at our institution. In addition, we compared the performance of our new and old radiation sensors and that of a skin dose monitor (SDM), with ion chamber reference values. We evaluated the fundamental characteristics (e.g., energy dependence, dose dependence, and angular dependence) of the RTSD developed by us in the diagnostic X-ray energy range. The performance of our RTSD was similar to that of the SDM. In particular, the new radiation sensor of our RTSD demonstrated better dose rate dependence compared to the old sensor. In addition, the new sensor had the advantage of being small in size and thus minimally affecting the X-ray images compared to the old sensor. Therefore, the developed skin dosimeter and radiation sensor may be useful in real-time measurement of patients' exposure to and multi-channel monitoring of radiation in IR procedures. The new dosimeter system can be recommended for visualization and management of the radiation dose to which the patients' skin is exposed.


Subject(s)
Radiation Dosimeters , Radiology, Interventional/instrumentation , Skin/radiation effects , Time Factors
17.
J Radiol Prot ; 37(2): N19-N26, 2017 Jun 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28488591

ABSTRACT

There are no feasible real-time and direct skin dosimeters for interventional radiology. One would be available if there were x-ray phosphors that had no brightness change caused by x-ray irradiation, but the emission of the Y2O3:Eu, (Y, Gd, Eu)BO3, and YVO4:Eu phosphors investigated in our previous study was reduced by x-ray irradiation. We found that the brightness of those phosphors recovered, and the purpose of this study is to investigate their recovery phenomena. It is expected that more kinds of phosphors could be used in x-ray dosimeters if the brightness changes caused by x-rays are elucidated and prevented. Three kinds of phosphors-Y2O3:Eu, (Y, Gd, Eu)BO3, and YVO4:Eu-were irradiated by x-rays (2 Gy) to reduce their brightness. After the irradiation, brightness changes occurring at room temperature and at 80 °C were investigated. The irradiation reduced the brightness of all the phosphors by 5%-10%, but the brightness of each recovered immediately both at room temperature and at 80 °C. The recovery at 80 °C was faster than that at room temperature, and at both temperatures the recovered brightness remained at 95%-98% of the brightness before the x-ray irradiation. The brightness recovery phenomena of Y2O3:Eu, (Y, Gd, Eu)BO3, and YVO4:Eu phosphors occurring after brightness deterioration due to x-ray irradiation were found to be more significant at 80 °C than at room temperature. More kinds of phosphors could be used in x-ray scintillation dosimeters if the reasons for the brightness changes caused by x-rays were elucidated.


Subject(s)
Luminescent Agents , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Radiology, Interventional , Radiometry/methods , Skin/radiation effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation , Heating , Humans , Luminescent Measurements , Materials Testing , Radiation Protection , X-Rays
18.
Sci Rep ; 7(1): 569, 2017 04 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28373715

ABSTRACT

It is important to measure the radiation dose [3-mm dose equivalent, Hp(3)] in the eye. This study was to determine the current occupational radiation eye dose of staff conducting interventional cardiology procedures, using a novel direct eye dosimeter. We measured the occupational eye dose [Hp(3)] in physicians and nurses in a catheterization laboratory for 6-months. The eye doses [Hp(3)] of 12 physicians (9 with Pb glasses, 3 without), and 11 nurses were recorded using a novel direct eye dosimeter, the DOSIRISTM. We placed dosimeters above and under the glasses. We also estimated the eye dose [0.07-mm dose equivalent] using a neck personal dosimeter. The eye doses among interventional staff ranked in the following order: physicians without Pb glasses > physicians with Pb glasses > nurses. The shielding effect of the glasses (0.07-mm Pb) in a clinical setting was approximately 60%. In physicians who do not wear Pb glasses, the eye dose may exceed the new regulatory limit for IR staff. We found good correlations between the neck dosimeter dose and eye dosimeter dose (inside or outside glasses, R2 = 0.93 and R2 = 0.86, respectively) in physicians. We recommend that interventional physicians use an eye dosimeter for correct evaluation of the lens dose.


Subject(s)
Cardiologists , Eye/radiation effects , Occupational Exposure , Radiation Dosage , Radiation Exposure , Radiology, Interventional , Humans , Nurses , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Radiation Exposure/adverse effects , Radiation Protection , Radiometry
19.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry ; 175(1): 31-37, 2017 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27624894

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research was to measure accurate patient entrance skin dose and maximum skin absorbed dose (MSD) to prevent radiation skin injuries in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). We directly measured the MSD on 50 PCIs by using multiple radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeters and a modified dosimetry gown. Also, we analysed the correlation between the MSD and indirect measurement parameters, such as fluoroscopic time (FT), dose-area product (DAP) and cumulative air kerma (C-AK). There were very strong correlations between MSD and FT, DAP and C-AK, with the correlation between MSD and C-AK being the strongest (r = 0.938). In conclusion, the regression lines using MSD as an outcome value (y) and C-AK as predictor variables (x) were y = 1.12x (R2 = 0.880). From the linear regression equation, MSD is estimated to be ~1.12 times that of C-AK in real time.


Subject(s)
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Radiation Dosimeters , Fluoroscopy , Humans , Radiation Dosage , Radiography, Interventional , Radiometry , Skin
20.
Phys Med ; 32(11): 1475-1478, 2016 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27825653

ABSTRACT

There is currently no effective real-time patient dosimeter available for use in interventional radiology (IR). We conducted a feasibility study in a clinical setting to investigate the use of the new dosimeter using photoluminescence sensors during procedures. Reference dosimeters were set at almost the same position of the prototype dosimeter sensors. We found excellent correlations between the reference measurements and those of the prototype dosimeter (r2=0.950). The sensor of the new dosimeter does not interfere with the IR procedure. The new dosimeter will be an effective tool for the real-time measurement of patient skin doses during IR.


Subject(s)
Radiation Dosimeters , Radiology, Interventional/instrumentation , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL