OCCUPATIONAL DOSE ASSESSMENT IN INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY IN SERBIA

Occupational dose measurement in interventional cardiology practice

Ensuring the safety of healthcare workers in interventional cardiology necessitates effective monitoring of occupational radiation exposure. This study aims to assess the accuracy of the over-apron single dosimetric approach compared with double dosimetric methods and explore the relationship between under-apron and over-apron doses. This investigation showed that the prescribed annual dose constraint of 20 mSv year-1 was not exceeded by the maximum annual occupational doses determined by dosimetric algorithms, which were 0.13 ± 0.02, 0.15 ± 0.02 and 0.27 ± 0.04 mSv, respectively. The study demonstrated excellent statistically significant correlations among single and double dosimetric algorithms and between direct under-apron and over-apron doses. Consequently, single dosimetric algorithms could effectively estimate doses for double dosimetric algorithms, highlighting the limited added value of under-apron measurements. These findings significantly impact the practice of interventional cardiology in Sri Lanka, playing a crucial role in enhancing radiation protection measures.

Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka

Interventional cardiologists face significant radiation exposure during interventional cardiology procedures. Therefore, this study focuses on assessing radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists during their procedures. Specifically, it aims to determine the effectiveness of both single and double dosimeter methods in estimating annual occupational radiation doses. This research holds pioneering significance as it represents the very first study undertaken in Sri Lanka. Thirteen interventional cardiologists performed 486 interventional cardiology procedures over three months in three different healthcare institutes. Active Hp(10) dosimeters were placed to measure radiation exposure. Effective doses were calculated using single and double dosimetric algorithms. Annual occupational doses were assessed on an operator basis. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess algorithmic differences and dose variations using the Kruskal-Wallis test and linear regression. The highest annual occupational dose for each dosimetric algorithm received as 2.00 ± 0.24 mSv, 2.29 ± 0.48 mSv, 3.35 ± 0.71 mSv, and 2.64 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively, and remained below the recommended safety limit of 20 mSv/year. The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed no significant differences in the effective doses among double dosimetric algorithms, as well as between single and double dosimetric algorithms (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed strong correlations among various algorithms, demonstrating consistency. The findings of this study hold significant effects on interventional cardiology practice in Sri Lanka, enhancing radiation safety and monitoring.

Occupational eye dose to medical staff in various interventional cardiologic procedures: is the need for lead goggles the same in all groups of radiation workers?

Considering the increased use of interventional cardiologic procedures and concern about irradiation to the eyes, it is necessary to measure eye dose in radiation workers. The assessment of eye dose using collar dose is a routine but inaccurate method. Therefore this study was designed to measure eye dose in the radiation workers of various interventional cardiologic procedures. In this study eye dose was measured for left and right eyes in three groups of radiation workers in angiography ward of Afshar hospital in various procedures using TLD. Measurements were done separately for cardiologists, nurses and radio-technologists in 100 procedures. The nurses functioned as surgical assistants and were usually close to the table. The correlation of staff dose to exposure parameters was also investigated. Eye dose in physicians were higher than other staff in all procedures. Also the left eye dose was considerably higher than right one, especially for physicians. The median equivalent dose per procedure of left eye for physicians, nurses and radio-technologists were 7.4, 3.6, 1.4 µSv (PCI) and 3.2, 3.1, 1.3 µSv (Adhoc) and 3.2, 1.7, 1.1 µSv (CA), respectively. The annual left eye equivalent dose with (without) using lead goggles were 2.4 (15.3), 1.4 (2.2), 1.0 (1.1) mSv for physicians, nurses and radio-technologists, respectively. There were also a positive correlation between eye dose and KAP for procedures without lead goggles. The lead goggles showed lower protection effects for radio-technologists than other staff. Only 30% of physicians received a dose higher than 1/3 of the ICRP annual dose limit, therefor only physician eye dose should be monitored in catheterization labs.