Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Eurados review of retrospective dosimetry techniques for internal exposures to ionising radiation and their applications.
Giussani, A; Lopez, M A; Romm, H; Testa, A; Ainsbury, E A; Degteva, M; Della Monaca, S; Etherington, G; Fattibene, P; Güclu, I; Jaworska, A; Lloyd, D C; Malátová, I; McComish, S; Melo, D; Osko, J; Rojo, A; Roch-Lefevre, S; Roy, L; Shishkina, E; Sotnik, N; Tolmachev, S Y; Wieser, A; Woda, C; Youngman, M.
Affiliation
  • Giussani A; BfS-Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany. agiussani@bfs.de.
  • Lopez MA; CIEMAT - Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas, Av.da Complutense 40, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
  • Romm H; BfS-Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, 85764, Oberschleißheim, Germany.
  • Testa A; ENEA Casaccia Research Center, Via Anguillarese 301, Santa Maria di Galeria, 00123, Rome, Italy.
  • Ainsbury EA; Public Health England - Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0RQ, Oxon, UK.
  • Degteva M; Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine (URCRM), Vorovskt str. 68A, Chelyabinsk, 454141, Russia.
  • Della Monaca S; Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Viale Regina Elena 299, 00161, Rome, Italy.
  • Etherington G; Public Health England - Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0RQ, Oxon, UK.
  • Fattibene P; Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Viale Regina Elena 299, 00161, Rome, Italy.
  • Güclu I; Cekmece Nuclear Research and Training Center Radiobiology Unit Yarimburgaz, Turkish Atomic Energy Authority, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Jaworska A; DSA-Norwegian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Skøyen, P. O. Box 329, 0213, Oslo, Norway.
  • Lloyd DC; Public Health England - Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0RQ, Oxon, UK.
  • Malátová I; SURO-National Radiation Protection Institute, Bartoskova 28, 14000, Prague, Czech Republic.
  • McComish S; US Transuranium and Uranium Registries, Washington State University, Richland, WA, USA.
  • Melo D; Melohill Technology, 1 Research Court, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA.
  • Osko J; National Centre for Nuclear Research, A. Soltana 7, 05400, Otwock, Poland.
  • Rojo A; ARN-Nuclear Regulatory Authority of Argentina, Av. del Libertador 8250, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Roch-Lefevre S; Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, IRSN, Pôle Santé et Environnement, Direction de la Santé, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
  • Roy L; Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, IRSN, Pôle Santé et Environnement, Direction de la Santé, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
  • Shishkina E; Urals Research Center for Radiation Medicine (URCRM), Vorovskt str. 68A, Chelyabinsk, 454141, Russia.
  • Sotnik N; Chelyabinsk State University (ChelSU), 129, Bratiev Kashirinih Street, Chelyabinsk, 454001, Russia.
  • Tolmachev SY; Southern Urals Biophysics Institute (SUBI), Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk Region, 456780, Russia.
  • Wieser A; US Transuranium and Uranium Registries, Washington State University, Richland, WA, USA.
  • Woda C; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.
  • Youngman M; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Helmholtz Zentrum München, Ingolstädter Landstr. 1, 85764, Neuherberg, Germany.
Radiat Environ Biophys ; 59(3): 357-387, 2020 08.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32372284
This work presents an overview of the applications of retrospective dosimetry techniques in case of incorporation of radionuclides. The fact that internal exposures are characterized by a spatially inhomogeneous irradiation of the body, which is potentially prolonged over large periods and variable over time, is particularly problematic for biological and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) dosimetry methods when compared with external exposures. The paper gives initially specific information about internal dosimetry methods, the most common cytogenetic techniques used in biological dosimetry and EPR dosimetry applied to tooth enamel. Based on real-case scenarios, dose estimates obtained from bioassay data as well as with biological and/or EPR dosimetry are compared and critically discussed. In most of the scenarios presented, concomitant external exposures were responsible for the greater portion of the received dose. As no assay is available which can discriminate between radiation of different types and different LETs on the basis of the type of damage induced, it is not possible to infer from these studies specific conclusions valid for incorporated radionuclides alone. The biological dosimetry assays and EPR techniques proved to be most applicable in cases when the radionuclides are almost homogeneously distributed in the body. No compelling evidence was obtained in other cases of extremely inhomogeneous distribution. Retrospective dosimetry needs to be optimized and further developed in order to be able to deal with real exposure cases, where a mixture of both external and internal exposures will be encountered most of the times.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiation, Ionizing / Radiometry Limits: Animals / Humans Language: En Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Year: 2020 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Country of publication:

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiation, Ionizing / Radiometry Limits: Animals / Humans Language: En Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Year: 2020 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Country of publication: