Staff lens doses in interventional urology. A comparison with interventional radiology, cardiology and vascular surgery values

National Diagnostic Reference Levels for Standard Descending Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair and Optimisation Strategies

OBJECTIVE

The International Commission on Radiological Protection has highlighted the large number of medical specialties that use fluoroscopy outside diagnostic imaging departments without radiation protection programmes for patients and staff. Vascular surgery is one of these specialties. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a complicated procedure requiring radiation protection guidance and optimisation. The recent EU Basic Safety Standards Directive requires the use and periodic updating of diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for interventional procedures. The aim of this study was to determine doses for patients undergoing TEVAR with mobile Xray systems and hybrid rooms (fixed Xray systems) to obtain national DRLs and to suggest optimisation actions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross sectional study. The Spanish Chapter of Endovascular Surgery conducted a national survey in 11 autonomous communities representing around 77.6% of the Spanish population (47.33 million inhabitants). A total of 266 TEVAR procedures from 17 Spanish centres were analysed, of which 53.0% were performed in hybrid operating rooms. National DRLs were obtained and defined as the third quartile of the median values from the different participating centres.

RESULTS

The proposed national DRLs are: for kerma area product (KAP), 113.81 Gy·cm2 for mobile Xray systems and 282.59 Gy·cm2 for hybrid rooms; and for cumulative air kerma (CAK) at the patient entry reference point, 228.38 mGy for mobile systems and 910.64 mGy for hybrid rooms.

CONCLUSION

Based on the requirement to know radiation doses for standard endovascular procedures, this study of TEVARs demonstrated that there is an increased factor of 2.48 in DRLs for KAP when the procedure is performed in a hybrid room compared with mobile C-arm systems, and an increased factor of 3.98 in DRLs for CAK when the procedure is performed with hybrid equipment. These results will help to optimise strategies to reduce radiation doses during TEVAR procedures.

Medical staff dose estimation during pediatric cardiac interventional procedures

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the occupational doses (eye lens, extremities and whole body) in paediatric cardiac interventional and diagnostic catheterization procedures performed in a paediatric reference hospital located in Recife, Pernambuco. For eye lens dosimetry, the results show that the left eye receives a higher dose than the right eye, and there is a small difference between the doses received during diagnostic (D) and therapeutic (T) procedures. The extrapolated annual values for the most exposed eye are close to the annual limit. For doses to the hands, it was observed that in a significant number of procedures (37 out of 45 therapeutic procedures, or 82%) at least one hand of the physician was exposed to the primary beam. During diagnostic procedures, the physician's hand was in the radiation field in 11 of the 17 catheterization procedures (65%). This resulted in a 10-fold increase in dose to the hands. The results underscore the need for optimization of radiation safety and continued efforts to engage staff in a radiation safety culture.

Radiation exposure of urologists during endourological procedures: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Ionizing radiation is used daily during endourological procedures. Despite the dangers of both deterministic and stochastic effects of radiation, there is a lack of knowledge and awareness among urologists. This study reviewed the literature to identify the radiation exposure (RE) of urologists during endourological procedures.

METHODS

A literature search of the Medline, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted to collect articles related to the radiation dose to urologists during endourological procedures. A total of 1966 articles were screened. 21 publications met the inclusion criteria using the PRIMA standards.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included, of which 14 were prospective. There was a large variation in the mean RE to the urologist between studies. PCNL had the highest RE to the urologist, especially in the prone position. RE to the eyes and hands was highest in prone PCNL, compared to supine PCNL. Wearing a thyroid shield and lead apron resulted in a reduction of RE ranging between 94.1 and 100%. Educational courses about the possible dangers of radiation decreased RE and increased awareness among endourologists.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review in the literature analyzing RE to urologists over a time period of more than four decades. Wearing protective garments such as lead glasses, a thyroid shield, and a lead apron are essential to protect the urologist from radiation. Educational courses on radiation should be encouraged to further reduce RE and increase awareness on the harmful effects of radiation, as the awareness of endourologists is currently very low.

[Radiation-induced cataract-an occult risk for urologists]

BACKGROUND

Radiation-induced cataracts represent a relevant risk to people occupationally exposed to radiation. The annual limit dose for the eye lens was reduced to 20 mSv per year by German legislation (radiation protect law StrlSchG 2017; 2013/59/Euratom) based on recommendation of International Commission on Radiation Protection (2011 ICRP) to avoid radiation-induced cataracts.

OBJECTIVES

Is there a risk of exceeding the annual limit dose for the eye lens in routine urological practice without special radiation protection for the head?

METHODS

As part of a prospective, monocentric dosimetry study, of 542 different urological, fluoroscopically guided interventions, the eye lens dose was determined using a forehead dosimeter (thermo-luminescence dosemeter TLD, Chipstrate) over a period of 5 months.

RESULTS

An average head dose of 0.05 mSv per intervention (max. 0.29 mSv) was found with an average dose area product of 485.33 Gy/cm². Significant influencing factors for a higher dose were a higher patient body mass index (BMI), a longer operation time, and a higher dose area product. The level of experience of the surgeon showed no significant influence.

DISCUSSION

With 400 procedures per year or an average of 2 procedures per working day, the critical annual limit value for the eye lenses or for the risk of radiation-induced cataract would be exceeded without special protective measures.

CONCLUSION

Consistently effective radiation protection of the eye lens is essential for daily work in uroradiological interventions. This may require further technical developments.

LENS EQUIVALENT DOSE OF STAFF DURING ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY: DOSE COMPARISON USING TWO TYPES OF DOSEMETERS

This study aimed to compare the lens equivalent dose (LED) measured during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) using DOSIRIS™ as a dedicated dosemeter to that measured using glass badges to determine if glass badges can be alternative tools for LED measurement. LEDs for physicians during ERCP were measured using the DOSIRIS™ [3-mm dose equivalent] worn on the outer edge of the eyes and personal dosemeters (glass badges) [0.07-mm dose equivalent] worn on the right and left sides of the neck. The cumulated doses over 6 months for the left eye using DOSIRIS™ were 9.5 and 11.8 mSv for physicians A and B, whereas doses measured using glass badges were 7.5 and 11.6 mSv, respectively. The LEDs of the physicians at the left eye and left neck side showed almost similar values and were significantly correlated (r = 0.95; p < 0.01). For an accurate LED measurement during ERCP, using a dosemeter such as DOSIRIS™ is recommended, although similar LED estimation values were reported using glass badges on the left neck side.

What are useful methods to reduce occupational radiation exposure among radiological medical workers, especially for interventional radiology personnel?

Protection against occupational radiation exposure in clinical settings is important. This paper clarifies the present status of medical occupational exposure protection and possible additional safety measures. Radiation injuries, such as cataracts, have been reported in physicians and staff who perform interventional radiology (IVR), thus, it is important that they use shielding devices (e.g., lead glasses and ceiling-suspended shields). Currently, there is no single perfect radiation shield; combinations of radiation shields are required. Radiological medical workers must be appropriately educated in terms of reducing radiation exposure among both patients and staff. They also need to be aware of the various methods available for estimating/reducing patient dose and occupational exposure. When the optimizing the dose to the patient, such as eliminating a patient dose that is higher than necessary, is applied, exposure of radiological medical workers also decreases without any loss of diagnostic benefit. Thus, decreasing the patient dose also reduces occupational exposure. We propose a novel four-point policy for protecting medical staff from radiation: patient dose Optimization, Distance, Shielding, and Time (pdO-DST). Patient dose optimization means that the patient never receives a higher dose than is necessary, which also reduces the dose received by the staff. The patient dose must be optimized: shielding is critical, but it is only one component of protection from radiation used in medical procedures. Here, we review the radiation protection/reduction basics for radiological medical workers, especially for IVR staff.

Assessment of eye doses to staff involved in interventional cardiology procedures in Kuwait

In this study, which is the first of its kind in the gulf region, eye doses of interventional cardiologists and nurses were measured using active dosimeters for left and right eyes, in 60 percutaneous coronary interventions in three main hospitals in Kuwait. The dose given in terms of H_p(0.07) per procedure when ceiling suspended screens were used by main operators ranged from 18.5 to 30.3 µSv for the left eye and from 12.6 to 23.6 µSv for the right eye. Taking into account typical staff workload, the results show that the dose limit of 20 mSv/year to the eyes can be exceeded for interventional cardiologists in some situations, which demonstrates the need of using additional effective radiation protection tools, e.g. protective eye spectacles, in addition to the regular and proper use of ceiling suspended screens. With indications of increase in workload, the need for availability of a dedicated active dosimeter for the regular monitoring of eye doses is emphasized.

Evaluation of novel X-ray protective eyewear in reducing the eye dose to interventional radiology physicians

The new recommendation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection for occupational eye dose is an equivalent dose limit to the eye of 20 mSv year-1, averaged over a 5-year period. This recommendation is a drastic reduction from the previous limit of 150 mSv year-1. Hence, it is important to protect physicians' eyes from X-ray radiation. Particularly in interventional radiology (IVR) procedures, many physicians use protective lead (Pb) glasses to reduce their occupational exposure. This study assessed the shielding effects of novel 0.07 mm Pb glasses. The novel glasses (XR-700) have Pb-acrylic lens molded in three dimensions. We studied the novel type of 0.07 mm Pb glasses over a period of seven consecutive months. The eye dose occupational radiation exposure of seven IVR physicians was evaluated during various procedures. All IVR physicians wore eye dosimeters (DOSIRIS™) close to the left side of the left eye. To calculate the shielding effects of the glasses, this same type of eye dosimeter was worn both inside and outside of the Pb lenses. The average shielding effect of the novel glasses across the seven physicians was 61.4%. Our results suggest an improved shielding effect for IVR physicians that use these glasses. No physician complained that the new glasses were uncomfortable; therefore comfort is not a problem. The lightweight glasses were acceptable to IVR physicians, who often must perform long procedures. Thus, the novel glasses are comfortable and reasonably protective. Based on the results of this study, we recommend that IVR physicians use these novel 0.07 mm Pb glasses to reduce their exposure.

Radiation exposure of patients during endourological procedures: IAEA-SEGUR study

Fluoroscopy is increasingly used to guide minimally invasive endourological procedures and optimised protocols are needed to minimise radiation exposure while achieving best treatment results. This multi-center study of radiation exposure of patients was conducted by the South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research (SEGUR), in cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Seven clinical centers from the SEGUR group collected data for 325 procedures performed within a three-months period, including standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), mini PCNL, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), semirigid ureterorenoscopy (URS) and flexible URS. Data included: air kerma area product (P_KA), air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (K_a,r), fluoroscopy time (FT), number of radiographic images (N) and fluoroscopy pulse rate, as well as total procedure duration, size and location of stones. Data were centrally analysed and statistically compared. MedianP_KAvalues per center varied 2-fold for RIRS (0.80-1.79 Gy cm²), 7.1 fold for mini-PCNL (1.39-9.90 Gy cm²), 7.3 fold for PCNL (2.40-17.50 Gy cm²), 19 fold (0.13-2.51 Gy cm²) for semi-rigid URS and 29-fold for flexible URS (0.10-2.90 Gy cm²). LowerP_KAandK_a,rwere associated with use of lower FT,Nand lower fluoroscopy pulse rate. FT varied from 0.1 to 14 min, a small fraction of the total procedure time, ranging from 10 to 225 min. HigherNwas associated with higherP_KAandK_a,r. Higher medianP_KAin PCNL was associated with the use of supine compared to prone position. No correlation was found between the concrement size and procedure duration, FT,P_KAorK_a,r. Dose values for RIRS were significantly lower compared to PCNL. The maximumK_a,rvalue of 377 mGy was under the threshold for radiation induced skin erythema. The study demonstrated a potential for patient dose reduction by lowering FT andN, using pulsed fluoroscopy and beam collimation.

Evaluation of a 3D printed OSL eye lens dosimeter for photon dosimetry

This work demonstrates the use of high-resolution 3D printing to fine-tune the low energy dependence of an eye lens dosimeter holder associated to a BeO OSL detector element (ezClip). Five geometries of the denominated iBe dosimeter were developed, three with a variation in the thickness of the wall in front of the sensitive element that tailor the response at low radiation energies; and three with variations of width and curvature in order to vary the angular response of the dosimeter badges. Additive manufacturing was accomplished using stereolithography which gave a high degree of accuracy and precision. The optimised dosimeter badges showed a low energy and angular dependence, within -20% to +20% in the energy range of 24 keV to 662 keV and from 0 to 60° incidence; and within -10% to +10% in the energy range of 24 keV to 164 keV and from 0 to 60° incidence. In contrast to other dosimeters with higher effective atomic numbers, the use of BeO as the sensitive element resulted in a flat energy and angular dependence response at low energies. A significant reduction in the measurement uncertainty in the diagnostic radiology energy range was achieved.

Taller staff occupationally exposed to less radiation to the temple in cardiac procedures, but risk higher doses during vascular cases

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of nurse and doctor height on occupational dose to the temple during fluoroscopically guided cardiovascular procedures. Additionally, an evaluation of the relationship between doctor height and table height was performed. Staff exposed during fluoroscopic procedures may be at elevated risk of cardiovascular damage or oncogenesis and have demonstrated a higher incidence of subscapular cataracts. The heads of taller staff may be exposed to reduced levels of radiation due to the increased distance from the area of highest intensity X-ray scatter. Limited research has been performed investigating height as a predictor of head dose to nursing staff. The level of radiation dose at the level of the temple to the doctor (n = 25), scrub (n = 28), and scout nurse (n = 29) was measured in a prospective single-center, observational study using Philips DoseAware badges. Procedural characteristics were recorded for vascular and cardiac cases performed in three dedicated angiography suites. Data were also collected to investigate relationships between doctor height and table height. Data were collected for 1585 cardiac and 294 vascular procedures. Staff height was a statistically significant predictor of temple dose for doctors, scrub, and scout nurses when considering the full data sample. The log temple dose demonstrated an inverse relationship to staff height during cardiac procedures, but a positive relationship for scrub and scout nurses during vascular studies. This observational study has demonstrated that taller staff are exposed to less cranial exposure dose during fluoroscopically guided cardiac examinations but has revealed a positive correlation between height and temple dose during vascular procedures. It was also determined that doctor height was correlated with average procedural table height and that vascular access point influences the choice of table elevation.

Radiation Exposure of Surgical Team During Endourological Procedures: International Atomic Energy Agency-South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research Study

Introduction: Fluoroscopy-guided endourology procedures require proper radiation protection to minimize radiation risk. This multicenter study aimed at investigating radiation protection practice and related radiation exposure of operating team members. Materials and Methods: Six endourology centers from the South-Eastern European Group for Urolithiasis Research answered questionnaires and collected data of 315 procedures performed within a 3-months period, with simultaneous measurement of dose to staff and dose area product (DAP) to patient. A pair of calibrated personal dosimeters, one for body and one for eye-lens dose, was worn by all key staff members. Dosimeters were centrally calibrated, measured, and analyzed. Results: The annual workload ranged from 173 to 865 procedures per center. Practice of personal dose monitoring and use of radiation protection shielding was found to be inconsistent. Lead aprons and thyroid collars were used by all, whereas protective eyewear was used in only half of centers. Due to the regular use of protective aprons, the whole-body dose of all 44 monitored staff members was safely below the regulatory dose limits. Eye-lens dose of 17 (14 urologists and 3 assisting staff) was above the dosimeter detection level, and dose per procedure varied from <10 to 63 μSv. The highest annual eye-lens dose of 13.5 mSv was found for the surgeon in the busiest department by using an over-the-couch X-ray tube without a ceiling suspended screen. Working closer to patient body with no protection resulted in a six-time higher eye-lens dose per DAP for a surgeon compared with others in the same center. Lower eye-dose per procedure was associated with lower DAP to patient and with the use of an under-the-couch tube, lower fluoroscopy pulse rate, collimation, fluoroscopy time, and acquired images. Conclusions: The study results call for the need to establish standard protocols about use of fluoroscopy during endourology procedures and to increase radiation protection knowledge and awareness of surgical staff.

National Diagnostic Reference Levels for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair and Optimisation Strategies

OBJECTIVE

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has highlighted the large number of medical specialties using fluoroscopy outside imaging departments without programmes of radiation protection (RP) for patients and staff. Vascular surgery is one of these specialties and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is one of the most challenging procedures requiring RP guidance and optimisation actions. The recent European Directive on Basic Safety Standards requires the use and regular update of diagnostic reference levels (DRL) for interventional procedures. The objective of the study was to know the doses of patients undergoing EVAR with mobile Xray systems and with hybrid rooms (fixed Xray systems), to obtain national DRLs and suggest optimisation actions.

METHODS

The Spanish Chapter of Endovascular Surgery launched a national survey that involved hospitals for 10 autonomous communities representing the 77% of the Spanish population (46.7 million inhabitants). Patient dose values from mobile Xray systems were available from nine hospitals (sample of 165 EVAR procedures) and data from hybrid rooms, from seven hospitals, with dosimetric data from 123 procedures. The initial national DRLs have been obtained, as the third quartile of the median values from the different centres involved in the survey.

RESULTS

The proposed national DRLs are 278 Gy cm² for hybrid rooms and 87 Gy cm² for mobile Xray systems, and for cumulative air kerma (cumulative AK) at the patient entrance reference point, 1403 mGy for hybrid rooms, and 292 mGy for mobile systems.

CONCLUSION

An audit of patient doses for EVAR procedures to identify optimised imaging protocol strategies is needed. It is also appropriate to evaluate the diagnostic information required for EVAR procedures. The increase by a factor of 3.2 (for kerma area product) and 4.8 (for cumulative AK) in the DRLs needs to be justified when the procedures are performed in the hybrid rooms rather than with mobile Xray systems.

Radiation dose to the lens from CT of the head in young people

AIM

To determine cumulative scan frequencies and estimate lens dose for paediatric computed tomography (CT) head examinations in the context of potential cataract risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The cumulative number of head-region CT examinations among a cohort of 410,997 children and young adults who underwent CT in the UK between 1985 and 2014 was calculated. Images from a sample of these head examinations (n=668) were reviewed to determine the level of eye inclusion. Lens dose per scan was estimated using the computer program, NCICT V1.0, for different levels of eye inclusion and exposure settings typical of past and present clinical practice.

RESULTS

In total 284,878 patients underwent 448,108 head-region CT examinations. The majority of patients (72%) had a single recorded head-region examination. A small subset (∼1%, n=2,494) underwent ≥10 examinations, while 0.1% (n=387) underwent ≥20. The lens was included within the imaged region for 57% of reviewed routine head examinations. In many cases, this appeared to be intentional, i.e. protocol driven. In others, there appeared to have been an attempt to exclude the eyes through gantry angulation. Estimated lens doses were 20-75 mGy (mean: 47 mGy) where the eye was fully included within the examination range and 2-7 mGy (mean: 3.1 mGy) where the lens was fully excluded. Potential cumulative lens doses ranged from ∼3 mGy to ∼4,700 mGy, with 2,335 patients potentially receiving >500 mGy.

CONCLUSION

The majority of young people will receive cumulative lens doses well below 500 mGy, meaning the risk of cataract induction is likely to be very small.

Demonstrating Compliance With Proposed Reduced Lens of Eye Dose Limits in Nuclear Medicine Settings

Based on ongoing research on ionizing radiation thresholds for cataracts, the International Commission on Radiological Protection has proposed new guidelines lowering the annual occupational lens of eye dose limit from 150 mSv to 20 mSv. The International Atomic Energy Agency has operationalized these new guidelines. Subsequently, national/regional radiation protection regulators are reviewing their lens of eye dose limits with an aim of moving towards the proposed new limits, resulting in licensees having to demonstrate compliance. In health care settings, fluoroscopic interventional practices generally have higher lens of eye doses and nuclear medicine settings generally have lower doses. A prospective cohort (n = 19) of nuclear medicine technologists wore dedicated lens of eye dosimeters for a 3 mo period synchronized with their body dosimeter schedules. The lens of eye dosimeters were validated to have a linear response in the anticipated dose ranges. The participants worked in a relatively high-volume nuclear medicine practice, which included general and cardiac, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, radiopharmacy, and cyclotron operations. The annualized dose ranges were 0.0-3.68 mSv (lens of eye) and 0.48-4.72 mSv (whole body). There was a good correlation between lens of eye and body dosimeter readings (R = 0.67). There were no significant differences in lens of eye dose by work type, worker sex, or side on which the dosimeter was worn. The findings should be generalizable to other similar practices, especially in North America, and should be sufficient to demonstrate regulatory compliance in nuclear medicine settings with the proposed new lens of eye dose limits.

Risk of Radiation-Induced Cataracts: Investigation of Radiation Exposure to the Eye Lens During Endourologic Procedures

BACKGROUND

Due to new radiobiologic data, the International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends a dose limit of 20 mSv per year to the eye lens. Therefore, the IAEA International Basic Safety Standard and the European council directive 2013/59/EURATOM require a reduction of the annual dose limit from 150 to 20 mSv. Urologists are exposed to an elevated radiation exposure in the head region during fluoroscopic interventions, due to the commonly used overtable X-ray tubes and the rarely used radiation protection for the head. Aim of the study was to analyze real radiation exposure to the eye lens of the urologist during various interventions, during which the patient is in the lithotomy position.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The partial body doses (forehead and apron collar) of the urologists and surgical staff were measured over a period of 2 months. 95 interventions were performed on Uroskop Omnia Max workplaces (Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany). Interventions were class-divided in less (stage I) and more complex (stage II) interventions. Two dosimeter-types were applied, well-calibrated electronic personal dosimeter Mk2 and self-calibrated thermoluminescent dosimeter-100H (both Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). The radiation exposure parameters were documented using the dose area product (DAP) and the fluoroscopy time.

RESULTS

The correlation between DAP and the apron dose of the urologist was in average 0.07 μSv per 1 μGym². The more experienced urologists yielded a mean DAP of 166 μGym² for stage I and 415 μGym² for stage II procedures. The interventionist was exposed with 10 μSv in mean outside the lead apron collar. The mean dose value of the eye lenses per intervention was ascertained to 20 μSv (mean DAP: 233 μGym²).

CONCLUSIONS

The study setup allows a differentiated and time-resolved measurement of the radiation exposure, which was found heterogeneous depending on intervention and surgeon. In this setting, ∼1000 interventions can be performed until the annual eye lens dose limit is achieved.

Assessment of the occupational eye lens dose for clinical staff in interventional radiology, cardiology and neuroradiology

In accordance with recommendations by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, the current European Basic Safety Standards has adopted a reduced occupational eye lens dose limit of 20 mSv yr^-1. The radiation safety implications of this dose limit is of concern for clinical staff that work with relatively high dose x-ray angiography and interventional radiology. Presented in this work is a thorough assessment of the occupational eye lens dose based on clinical measurements with active personal dosimeters worn by staff during various types of procedures in interventional radiology, cardiology and neuroradiology. Results are presented in terms of the estimated equivalent eye lens dose for various medical professions. In order to compare the risk of exceeding the regulatory annual eye lens dose limit for the widely different clinical situations investigated in this work, the different medical professions were separated into categories based on their distinct work pattern: staff that work (a) regularly beside the patient, (b) in proximity to the patient and (c) typically at a distance from the patient. The results demonstrate that the risk of exceeding the annual eye lens dose limit is of concern for staff category (a), i.e. mainly the primary radiologist/cardiologist. However, the results also demonstrate that the risk can be greatly mitigated if radiation protection shields are used in the clinical routine. The results presented in this work cover a wide range of clinical situations, and can be used as a first indication of the risk of exceeding the annual eye lens dose limit for staff at other medical centres.