Optimisation of occupational radiological protection in image-guided interventions: potential impact of dose rate measurements

PERSONAL DOSIMETRY USING MONTE-CARLO SIMULATIONS FOR OCCUPATIONAL DOSE MONITORING IN INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY: THE RESULTS OF A PROOF OF CONCEPT IN A CLINICAL SETTING

Exposure levels to staff in interventional radiology (IR) may be significant and appropriate assessment of radiation doses is needed. Issues regarding measurements using physical dosemeters in the clinical environment still exist. The objective of this work was to explore the prerequisites for assessing staff radiation dose, based on simulations only. Personal dose equivalent, Hp(10), was assessed using simulations based on Monte Carlo methods. The position of the operator was defined using a 3D motion tracking system. X-ray system exposure parameters were extracted from the x-ray equipment. The methodology was investigated and the simulations compared to measurements during IR procedures. The results indicate that the differences between simulated and measured staff radiation doses, in terms of the personal dose equivalent quantity Hp(10), are in the order of 30-70 %. The results are promising but some issues remain to be solved, e.g. an automated tracking of movable parts such as the ceiling-mounted protection shield.

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.

Physician and Patient Radiation Exposure During Endovascular Procedures

OPINION STATEMENT

Endovascular procedures expose both patients and physicians to fluoroscopic ionizing radiation that carries a dose-dependent risk of acute toxicity and a small, but demonstrable, long-term risk of malignancy due to resultant genetic mutations. Exposure doses vary widely based upon patient-related factors including body size and anatomic complexity, operator technique, procedure type (diagnostic vs. therapeutic), vascular bed imaged, and imaging equipment employed. Effective dosage may vary as much as 200-fold for physicians and 20-fold for patients depending upon the procedure: for example, complex aortic interventions with branched graft devices may convey mean effective doses of more than 0.4 mSv for physicians and 100 mSv for patients, whereas distal, small-vessel angiography may entail mean effective doses of less than 0.002 mSv for physicians and 5 mSv for patients. Particular attention is given to physicians' ocular exposure, which may cause cataract development, and to hand exposure, which is significantly higher than total body exposure when operators work near the x-ray beam. Given the risks of radiation exposure, numerous strategies have been developed to reduce both physician and patient doses. These measures include physician education about dose-reducing imaging techniques, development of low-dose imaging equipment, introduction of new radiation shielding drapes and caps, and real-time dose monitoring. Here, we review physician and patient effective doses of radiation by procedure type as reported in the literature and present recent data regarding dose-reduction strategies.

OPTIMISATION OF OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION IN IMAGE-GUIDED INTERVENTIONS: EXPLORING VIDEO RECORDINGS AS A TOOL IN THE PROCESS

The overall purpose of this work was to explore how video recordings can contribute to the process of optimising occupational radiation protection in image-guided interventions. Video-recorded material from two image-guided interventions was produced and used to investigate to what extent it is conceivable to observe and assess dose-affecting actions in video recordings. Using the recorded material, it was to some extent possible to connect the choice of imaging techniques to the medical events during the procedure and, to a less extent, to connect these technical and medical issues to the occupational exposure. It was possible to identify a relationship between occupational exposure level to staff and positioning and use of shielding. However, detailed values of the dose rates were not possible to observe on the recordings, and the change in occupational exposure level from adjustments of exposure settings was not possible to identify. In conclusion, the use of video recordings is a promising tool to identify dose-affecting instances, allowing for a deeper knowledge of the interdependency between the management of the medical procedure, the applied imaging technology and the occupational exposure level. However, for a full information about the dose-affecting actions, the equipment used and the recording settings have to be thoroughly planned.