Radiation injury and the hand surgeon

Reducing hand radiation during renal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparison of radiation reduction techniques

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy confers the highest radiation to the urologist's hands compared to other urologic procedures. This study compares radiation exposure to the surgeon's hand and patient's body when utilizing three different techniques for needle insertion during renal access. Simulated percutaneous renal access was performed using a cadaveric patient and separate cadaveric forearm representing the surgeon's hand. Three different needle-holding techniques were compared: conventional glove (control), a radiation-attenuating glove, and a novel needle holder. Five 300-s fluoroscopy trials were performed per treatment arm. The primary outcome was radiation dose (mSv) to the surgeon's hand. The secondary outcome was radiation dose to the patient. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's B post-hoc tests were performed with p < 0.05 considered significant. Compared to the control (3.92 mSv), both the radiation-attenuating glove (2.48 mSv) and the needle holder (1.37 mSv) reduced hand radiation exposure (p < 0.001). The needle holder reduced hand radiation compared to the radiation-attenuating glove (p < 0.001). The radiation-attenuating glove resulted in greater radiation produced by the C-arm compared to the needle holder (83.49 vs 69.22 mGy; p = 0.019). Patient radiation exposure was significantly higher with the radiation-attenuating glove compared to the needle holder (8.43 vs 7.03 mSv; p = 0.027). Though radiation-attenuating gloves decreased hand radiation dose by 37%, this came at the price of a 3% increase in patient exposure. In contrast, the needle holder reduced exposure to both the surgeon's hand by 65% and the patient by 14%. Thus, a well-designed low-density needle holder could optimize radiation safety for both surgeon and patient.

The Effect of an Intraoperative Real-Time Counter on Radiation Exposure Events During Operative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures

PURPOSE

Occupational radiation exposure can have adverse health consequences for surgeons. The purpose of this study was to determine if utilization of an intraoperative, real-time radiograph counter results in decreased radiation exposure events (REEs) during open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRFs).

METHODS

We reviewed all cases of isolated ORIF DRFs performed at a single center from January 2021 to February 2023. All cases performed on or after January 1, 2022 used an intraoperative radiograph counter, referred to as a "shot-clock" (SC) group. Cases prior to this date were performed without a SC and served as a control group (NoSC group). Baseline demographics, fracture, and surgical characteristics were recorded. Final intraoperative radiographs were reviewed to record reduction parameters (radial inclination, volar tilt, and ulnar variance). REEs, fluoroscopy exposure times, and total radiation doses milligray (mGy) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 160 ORIF DRF cases were included in the NoSC group, and 135 were included in the SC group. The NoSC group had significantly more extra-articular fractures compared with the SC group. Reduction parameters after ORIF were similar between groups. The mean number of REEs decreased by 48% in the SC group. Cases performed with the SC group had significantly lower total radiation doses (0.8 vs 0.5 mGy) and radiation exposure times (41.9 vs 24.2 seconds). Mean operative times also decreased for the SC group (70 minutes) compared with that for the NoSC group (81 minutes).

CONCLUSIONS

A real-time intraoperative radiograph counter was associated with decreased REEs, exposure times, and total radiation doses during ORIF DRFs. Cases performed with a SC had significantly shorter operative times without compromising reduction quality. Using an intraoperative SC counter during cases requiring fluoroscopy may aid in decreasing radiation exposure, which serves as an occupational hazard for hand and upper-extremity surgeons.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

Using Ultrasonography During the Fixation of Distal Radius and Finger Fractures

Ultrasonography (US) is a noninvasive examination modality that is devoid of risk, both for the patient and the surgeon, compared with fluoroscopy. The principle is the same for distal radius and finger fractures: replace the fluoroscopy checks with US checks to reduce the patient's, surgeon's, and surgical team's exposure to radiation. In this article, the authors report their experience of the effectiveness of ultrasound imaging during the fixation of a distal radius and long finger fracture. They also describe equipment needed and surgical procedure.

Assessment of Radiation Protection in Hand-Shielding Products With Mini C-Arm Fluoroscopy

Background: Previous studies have highlighted the particular risk of radiation exposure to the surgeon's hands with intraoperative fluoroscopy. Although evidence exists that shielding equipment for the hands reduces exposure, the extent of protection is not well understood. Therefore, we set out to determine the degree to which radiation exposure to the surgeon's hands is decreased with hand-shielding products. Methods: An anthropomorphic model was positioned to simulate a surgeon sitting at a hand table. Thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed on the proximal phalanx of each index finger. The right index finger dosimeter was covered with a standard polyisoprene surgical glove (control arm), whereas the left index finger dosimeter was covered with commercially available hand-shielding products (study arm): lead-free metal-oxide gloves, leaded gloves, and radiation-attenuating cream. Mini fluoroscope position, configuration, and settings were standardized. The model was scanned for 15 continuous minutes in each test run, and each comparative arm was run 3 times. Results: The mean radiation dose absorbed by the control and variable dosimeters across all tests was 44.8 mrem (range, 30-54) and 18.6 mrem (range, 14-26), respectively. Each hand-shielding product resulted in statistically lower radiation exposure than a single polyisoprene surgical glove. Conclusions: The mean radiation exposure to the hands was significantly decreased when protected by radiation-attenuating options. Each product individually resulted in a statistically significant decrease in hand exposure compared with the control. We recommend that in addition to efforts to decrease radiation exposure, surgeons consider routine use of hand-shielding products when using mini c-arm fluoroscopy.

A Comparison of Image Quality and Radiation Exposure Between the Mini C-Arm and the Standard C-Arm

Background: The use of intraoperative fluoroscopy has become mandatory in osseous hand surgery. Due to its overall practicality, the mini C-arm has gained popularity among hand surgeons over the standard C-arm. This study compares image quality and radiation exposure for patient and staff between the mini C-arm and the standard C-arm, both with flat panel technology. Methods: An observer-based subjective image quality study was performed using a contrast detail (CD) phantom. Five independent observers were asked to determine the smallest circles discernable to them. The results were plotted in a graph, forming a CD curve. From each curve, an image quality figure (IQF) was derived. A lower IQF equates to a better image quality. The patients' entrance skin dose was measured, and to obtain more information about the staff exposure dose, a perspex hand phantom was used. The scatter radiation was measured at various distances and angles relative to a central point on the detector. Results: The IQF was significantly lower for the mini C-arm resulting in a better image quality. The patients' entrance dose was 10 times higher for the mini C-arm as compared with the standard C-arm, and the scatter radiation threefold. Conclusions: Due to its improved image quality and overall practicality, the mini C-arm is recommended for hand surgical procedures. To ensure that the surgeons' radiation exposure is not exceeding the safety limits, monitoring radiation exposure using mini C-arms with flat panel technology during surgery should be done in a future clinical study.

Does nonexistent of your hands on the screen guarantee no radiation exposure to your body? - Study on exposure of the practitioner's hands to radiation during C-arm fluoroscopy-guided injections and effectiveness of a new shielding device

Observational phantom study.This study aimed to evaluate the radiation exposure dose of practitioner's hands when performing C-arm guided procedures and to determine the usefulness of our newly designed radiation shielding device.C-arm guided procedures including lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) are commonly used for pain control induced by lumbar radiculopathy. The practitioner's hands are vulnerable to radiation exposure because of the long exposure time and short distance from the radiation resource. No studies to date have reported the cumulative exposure of the physician's hands according to location and exposure time.Using a chest phantom irradiated with X-rays under lumbar TFESI conditions, cumulative scatter radiation dose was measured at 36 points using a dosimeter. The measurements were checked at 1, 3, 5, 10 minutes of radiation exposure. The experiment was repeated using our newly designed shielding device.Significant radiation accumulation was observed in the field where the practitioner's hands might be placed during C-arm guided procedures. The further the distance from the radiation resource and the shorter the exposure time, the smaller was the cumulative radiation expose dose. The new shielding device showed an excellent shielding rate (66.0%-99.9%) when the dosimeter was within the shielding range. However, at some points, increased accumulated radiation exposure dose was observed, although the dosimeter was within the range of the shielding device.To reduce radiation exposure of the practitioner's hands when performing C-arm-guided procedures, the radiation exposure time should be decreased and a greater distance from the radiation resource should be maintained. When using our shielding device, placing the hand close to the device surface and minimizing the time using fluoroscopy minimized the radiation exposure of the hand.

Radiation Exposure to Surgeon and Assistant During Flat Panel Mini C-Arm Fluoroscopy in Hand and Wrist Surgical Procedures

PURPOSE

During mini C-arm fluoroscopy, both the patient and surgical team are exposed to scatter radiation. The objective of this study was to quantify body, thyroid, and hand radiation exposure to surgeon and assistant during intraoperative use of flat panel mini C-arm fluoroscopy in hand and wrist surgical procedures.

METHODS

Over 5 months, the surgeon's and assistant's radiation exposure was recorded during all osseous hand and wrist surgical procedures. Whole-body and thyroid radiation exposure were measured with 2 types of dosimeters: a photon thermoluminescence detector and a RaySafe i2 real-time dosimeter. Ring dosimeters were used to quantify hand radiation exposure.

RESULTS

Mini C-arm fluoroscopy was used in 94 surgical procedures. Total fluoroscopy time was 1,996 seconds and varied between surgical procedures (range, 1-152 seconds; median, 11 seconds). No thermoluminescence detector photon dosimeter exceeded the threshold limit of 0.1 mSv. The RaySafe i2 real-time dosimeters recorded a cumulated dose of 0.029 mSv for the body and 0.012 mSv for the thyroid position of the surgeon. The assistant received a cumulated dose of 0.011 mSv for the body and 0.011 mSv for the thyroid position. The ring dosimeters showed a cumulated dosage of 1.28 mSv for the surgeon and 0.20 mSv for the assistant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the surgeon's and assistant's body, thyroid, and hands were exposed to acceptable levels of scatter radiation during intraoperative use of the flat panel mini C-arm. The surgeon received the highest radiation exposure: 2.9% of the yearly radiation limits for the body, 0.05% for the thyroid position, and 2.56% for the hands. The assistant was exposed to less scatter radiation: 1.1% for the body, 0.04% for the thyroid, and 0.4% for the hands.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study quantified radiation levels to which surgeon and assistant are exposed during mini C-arm fluoroscopy in hand and wrist surgical procedures.

Radiation exposure and the orthopedic surgeon's hand: Measurement of the equivalent dose over 13 months

Exposure to ionizing radiation in the operating room is governed by practical prevention and protection measures on the international, national and local levels. We evaluated the equivalent dose to the hand of an orthopedic surgeon over 13 months. An orthopedic surgeon wore a ring dosimeter on the ring finger of his right hand for all surgical procedures requiring intraoperative fluoroscopy between March 2014 and April 2015. Monthly doses were evaluated by the IRSN over the study period. The number and type of procedures were compiled as well as the type of fluoroscopy unit used. Four hundred procedures were performed during this period, including 182 with fluoroscopy. The equivalent cumulative dose at the hand was 4,75 mSv. No correlation was found with the type of procedure or type of fluoroscopy unit (conventional or mini C-arm). Equivalent doses were below the annual regulatory limit in France of 500 mSv. These results are consistent with those reported in the literature. However, recent studies have noted that both younger surgeons in training and more experienced surgeons must remember to use radiation protection measures.

Radiation Exposure to the Hand of a Spinal Interventionalist during Fluoroscopically Guided Procedures

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study.

PURPOSE

During fluoroscopically guided spinal procedure, the hands of spinal surgeons are placed close to the field of radiation and may be exposed to ionizing radiation. This study directly measured the radiation exposure to the hand of a spinal interventionalist during fluoroscopically guided procedures.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Fluoroscopically guided spinal procedures have been reported to be a cause for concern due to the radiation exposure to which their operators are exposed.

METHODS

This prospective study evaluated the radiation exposure of the hand of one spinal interventionalist during 52 consecutive fluoroscopic spinal procedures over a 3-month period. The interventionalist wore three real-time dosimeters secured to the right forearm, under the lead apron over the chest, and outside the lead apron over the chest. Additionally, one radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter was placed under the lead apron over the left chest and one ring radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter was worn on the right thumb. The duration of exposure and radiation dose were measured for each procedure.

RESULTS

The average radiation exposure dose per procedure was 14.9 µSv, 125.6 µSv, and 200.1 µSv, inside the lead apron over the chest, outside the lead apron over the chest, and on the right forearm, respectively. Over the 3-month period, the protected radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter over the left chest recorded less than the minimum reportable dose, whereas the radiophotoluminescence glass ring dosimeter recorded 368 mSv for the thumb.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicated that the cumulative radiation dose measured at the dominant hand may exceed the annual dose limit specified by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Spinal interventionalists should take special care to limit the duration of fluoroscopy and radiation exposure.

Radiation exposure to hand surgeons' hands: a practical comparison of large and mini C-arm fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

To determine and compare the radiation exposure to surgeons' hands with large and mini C-arm fluoroscopy in a practical, clinically based model.

METHODS

Two hand surgeons monitored radiation exposure to their hands with a ring dosimeter over a 14-month period using large and mini C-arm fluoroscopic units. One surgeon performed all cases with a large C-arm unit in a hospital setting, and the other performed all cases with mini C-arms in surgical centers. For each case, fluoroscopic time, the output displayed by the unit, radiation by time, and ring dosimeter absorption were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 160 consecutive cases were reviewed with 71 cases and 89 cases in the large and mini C-arm groups, respectively. The median output displayed by the large C-arm was 0.7 mGy/case, and the median output displayed by the mini C-arm was 10.0 mGy/case. With output as a product of time, the median calculated values were 0.02 mGy/s for the large C-arm group and 0.28 mGy/s for the mini C-arm group. Cumulative ring dosimeter absorption to the surgeons' hands was found to be 380 mrem for 71 cases in the large C-arm group versus 1,000 mrem for 89 cases in the mini C-arm group.

CONCLUSIONS

In our model, the use of the mini C-arm resulted in more than a 10-fold increase in the rate of output and approximately double the dosimeter absorption to the surgeon's hand compared with the large C-arm. Although it has been shown that the mini C-arm produces less radiation scatter, in a practical model, it may not be a safer alternative with respect to the surgeon's hands. Based on these findings, we recommend that surgeons be more aware of radiation exposure risk, know their C-arm unit's specifications, and try to minimize radiation exposure.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

Radiation Injury Presenting to the Emergency Department: A Case Report

Radiation injuries are closer to home than expected as radioactive sources are common in daily life. Our case study illustrates a case of radiation burns to the hand which presented about two weeks later to the emergency department after accidental exposure to an industrial radiation source. A 45-year old Chinese man presented 17 days later after being exposed accidentally to iridium-192 source at 43 curies. He subsequently suffered burns that required multiple operations to treat. The diagnosis of patients who present early after exposure with no clinical signs will likely pose a challenge for the emergency medicine clinician as radiation burns take time to manifest and may present days to weeks after radiation exposure.

Rehabilitation of hand burn injuries: current updates

The improved short and long term survival rate of individuals with large burn injuries has made rehabilitation for optimal recovery of the patient increasingly important. Burn injury to the hands worsens the prospect of functional recovery and good quality of life in single events, especially when included in larger burns. The purpose of this paper is to present a narrative review of examination strategies used for children with burn injuries to the hands in the acute, intermediate and long term stages of rehabilitation, and apply these concepts to selected treatments, using a case that is representative of this complex patient population. The model of health described by the World Health Organisation provided the framework for the review, to structure the review in the domains of body structures and body functions, functional activities and participation in life roles. The lack of consensus in the burn literature regarding the most appropriate outcome measures and interventions necessitates futures research and long term outcome studies to identify, predict and prevent the difficulties patients may face over their lifespan.