Effect of the radiation protective apron on the response of active and passive personal dosemeters used in interventional radiology and cardiology

Medical staff monitoring in interventional cardiology: over apron dosemeter placement based on measurements and simulations

Interventional cardiology is characterized by high radiation exposure for both the patient and the operator. Adequate shielding and monitoring of the operator are fundamental to comply with radiation protection principles. In a previous work, the effect on the dose of the dosemeter position on the chest was studied. In this paper, the investigation has been completed, employing an anthropomorphic thorax phantom, equipped with arms. Although there are differences between the Monte Carlo simulations and the measurements, similar trends are observed, showing that the reduction in dose, due to the arms, is between 20 and 60%, compared with the situation without arms. For that reason, considering a dosemeter placed on the chest, the upper position, which is the least affected by the arms, should be preferred while the extreme lateral position, near the armpit, should be avoided.

Radiation exposure assessment of nuclear medicine staff administering [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE with active and passive dosimetry

BACKGROUND

The use of lutetium-177 (177Lu)-based radiopharmaceuticals in peptide receptor nuclear therapy is increasing, but so is the number of nuclear medicine workers exposed to higher levels of radiation. In recent years, [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE has begun to be widely used for the treatment of neuroendocrine tumours. However, there are few studies evaluating the occupational radiation exposure during its administration, and there are still some challenges that can result in higher doses to the staff, such as a lack of trained personnel or fully standardised procedures. In response, this study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of occupational doses to the staff involved in the administration of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE.

RESULTS

A total of 32 administrations of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE (7.4 GBq/session) carried out by a physician and a nurse, were studied. In total, two physicians and four nurses were independently monitored with cumulative (passive) and/or real-time (active) dosemeters. Extremity, eye lens and whole-body doses were evaluated in terms of the dosimetric quantities Hp(0.07), Hp(3) and Hp(10), respectively. It was obtained that lead aprons reduced dose rates and whole-body doses by 71% and 69% for the physicians, respectively, and by 56% and 68% for the nurses. On average, normalised Hp(10) values of 0.65 ± 0.18 µSv/GBq were obtained with active dosimetry, which is generally consistent with passive dosemeters. For physicians, the median of the maximum normalised Hp(0.07) values was 41.5 µSv/GBq on the non-dominant hand and 45.2 µSv/GBq on the dominant hand. For nurses 15.4 µSv/GBq on the non-dominant and 13.9 µSv/GBq on the dominant hand. The ratio or correction factor between the maximum dose measured on the hand and the dose measured on the base of the middle/ring finger of the non-dominant hand resulted in a factor of 5/6 for the physicians and 3/4 for the nurses. Finally, maximum normalised Hp(3) doses resulted in 2.02 µSv/GBq for physicians and 1.76 µSv/GBq for nurses.

CONCLUSIONS

If appropriate safety measures are taken, the administration of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE is a safe procedure for workers. However, regular monitoring is recommended to ensure that the annual dose limits are not exceeded.

Cardiologist's exposure to radiation in cath lab measured with InstadoseTMdosimeter

INTRODUCTION

complex fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures in cardiology are known to result in higher radiation doses for patients and staff.

PURPOSE

to estimate the equivalent dose received in different regions of the cardiologist's body in catheterism (CATH) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of monitoring the doses in the catheritization laboratory (cath lab) using a direct ion storage dosimeter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

the Instadose^TMand the thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD-100) were fixed simultaneously in the following regions of the cardiologist's body: near the eyes (left and right), the trunk region (over the lead apron) and the left ankle. Occupational doses were recorded during 86 procedures (60% CATH).

RESULTS

catheterization procedures showed third quartile dose values near to the left eye region equal to 0.10 mSv (TLD-100) and 0.12 (Instadose^TM) and for intervention 0.15 mSv (TLD-100 and Instadose^TM). The doses measured in the trunk region, over the lead apron, were about 13% higher for catheterization procedures and 20% higher for intervention procedures compared to left eye region measurements. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was applied for unpaired data for all body regions, comparing the data obtained between the TLD-100 and Instadose^TMdosimeters. For CATH and PCI, the responses of the TLD-100 and Instadose^TMdosimeters are considered equal for all analysed regions (p> 0.05) with the exception of the right eye region.

CONCLUSION

the Instadose^TMpassive dosimeter can be useful as a complementary assessment in the monitoring of a cardiologist's personal occupational doses in the cath lab.

What Is Worth Knowing in Interventional Practices about Medical Staff Radiation Exposure Monitoring: A Review of Recent Outcomes of EURADOS Working Group 12

EURADOS (European Radiation Dosimetry Group) Working Group 12 (WG12) SG1 activities are aimed at occupational radiation protection and individual monitoring in X-ray and nuclear medicine practices. In recent years, many studies have been carried out in these fields, especially for interventional radiology and cardiology workplaces (IC/IR). The complexity of the exposure conditions of the medical staff during interventional practices makes the radiation protection and monitoring of the exposed workers a challenging task. The scope of the present work is to review some of the main results obtained within WG12 activities about scattered field characterization and personal dosimetry that could be very useful in increasing the quality of radiation protection of the personnel, safety, and awareness of radiation risk. Two papers on Monte Carlo modelling of interventional theater and three papers on active personal dosimeters (APDs) for personnel monitoring were considered in the review. More specifically, Monte Carlo simulation was used as the main tool to characterize the levels of exposure of the medical staff, allowing to determine how beam energy and direction can have an impact on the doses received by the operators. Indeed, the simulations provided information about the exposure of the operator’s head, and the study concluded with the determination of an eye-lens protection factor when protection goggles and a ceiling shielding are used. Moreover, the review included the results of studies on active personal dosimeters, their use in IC/IR workplaces, and how they respond to calibration fields, with X-ray standard and pulsed beams. It was shown that APDs are insensitive to backscatter radiation, but some of them could not respond correctly to the very intense pulsed fields (as those next to the patient in interventional practices). The measurements during interventional procedures showed the potential capability of the employment of APDs in hospitals.

Staff dose evaluation by application of radiation protection during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures performed with a mobile C-arm

BACKGROUND

The radiation dose to staff performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is not negligible.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the shielding effect of a table-suspended lower-body radiation shield for the positions in the room occupied by the operator, assisting nurse, and anesthesiologist, used during ERCP procedures with a mobile C-arm.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eye lens dose, whole body dose, and extremity dose were measured with and without a table-suspended lower-body radiation shield in a phantom model and in clinical routine work. The effect of the shield was evaluated for each scenario and compared, and a projection was made for when shielding should be required from a regulatory point of view.

RESULTS

In the phantom measurements, the shield provided significant shielding effects on the body and lower extremities for the operator but no significant shielding of the eye lens. The shielding effect for the assisting nurse was limited to the lower extremity. The clinical measurements yielded the same general result as the phantom measurements, with the major difference that the shield provided no significant reduction in the whole-body dose to the operator.

CONCLUSION

The table-suspended shield has a significant shielding effect for the lower extremities of the operator and assisting nurse. For annual dose-area product values >300,000 cGycm², the protection of the operator should be reinforced with a ceiling-suspended shield to avoid doses to the eye lens and body in excess of regulatory dose restrictions.

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.

Recommendations for the use of active personal dosemeters (APDs) in interventional workplaces in hospitals

Occupational radiation doses from interventional procedures have the potential to be relatively high. The requirement to optimise these doses encourages the use of electronic or active personal dosimeters (APDs) which are now increasingly used in hospitals. They are typically used in tandem with a routine passive dosimetry monitoring programme, with APDs used for real-time readings, for training purposes and when new imaging technology is introduced. However, there are limitations when using APDs. A survey in hospitals to identify issues related to the use of APDs was recently completed, along with an extensive series of APD tests by the EURADOS Working Group 12 on Dosimetry for Medical Imaging. The aim of this review paper is to summarise the state of the art regarding the use of APDs. We also used the results of our survey and our tests to develop a set of recommendations for the use of APDs in the clinical interventional radiology/cardiology settings, and draw attention to some of the current challenges.

Correlation between eye lens doses and over apron doses in interventional procedures

Measurements of eye lens dose using over apron dosimeters with a geometric correction factor is an international accepted practice. However, further knowledge regarding geometric correction factors in different contexts is required. The authors studied the correlation between eye lens dose and over apron dosimetry for different medical specialties in eleven hospitals, using a standardized protocol, two independent over apron dosimeters (worn at chest and at neck levels) and a dedicated calibration procedure. The results show good correlation between subjects working on the same medical specialty for 5 specialties: Interventional Radiology, Vascular Surgery, Vascular Radiology, Hemodynamics and Neuroradiology. The geometric correction factors resulting from this study could be used to estimate eye lens dose using over apron dosimeters, which are more comfortable than eye lens dosimeters, as reported by the study subjects, as long as the increased uncertainty of the over apron dosimetry compared to the dedicated eye lens dosimetry is acceptable.

THE USE OF ACTIVE PERSONAL DOSEMETERS IN INTERVENTIONAL WORKPLACES IN HOSPITALS: COMPARISON BETWEEN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE DOSEMETERS WORN SIMULTANEOUSLY BY MEDICAL STAFF

Medical staff in interventional procedures are among the professionals with the highest occupational doses. Active personal dosemeters (APDs) can help in optimizing the exposure during interventional procedures. However, there can be problems when using APDs during interventional procedures, due to the specific energy and angular distribution of the radiation field and because of the pulsed nature of the radiation. Many parameters like the type of interventional procedure, personal habits and working techniques, protection tools used and X-ray field characteristics influence the occupational exposure and the scattered radiation around the patient. In this paper, we compare the results from three types of APDs with a passive personal dosimetry system while being used in real clinical environment by the interventional staff. The results show that there is a large spread in the ratios of the passive and active devices.