The importance of protection glasses during neuroangiographies: A study on radiation exposure at the lens of the primary operator

Radiation in Gastroenterology

The benefit of radiation is immense in the field of gastroenterology. Radiation is used daily in different gastrointestinal imaging and diagnostic and therapeutic interventional procedures. Radiotherapy is one of the primary modalities of treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies. There are various modalities of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy can injure malignant cells by directly damaging DNA, RNA, proteins, and lipids and indirectly by forming free radicals. External beam radiation, internal beam radiation and radio-isotope therapy are the major ways of delivering radiation to the malignant tissue. Radiation can also cause inflammation, fibrosis, organ dysfunction, and malignancy. Patients with repeated exposure to radiation for diagnostic imaging and therapeutic procedures are at slightly increased risk of malignancy. Gastrointestinal endoscopists performing fluoroscopy-guided procedures are also at increased risk of malignancy and cataract formation. The radiological protection society recommends certain preventive and protective measures to avoid side effects of radiation. Gastrointestinal complications related to radiation therapy for oncologic processes, and exposure risks for patients and health care providers involved in diagnostic or therapeutic imaging will be discussed in this review.

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN TYPES OF PROTECTIVE EYEWEAR AND EYE LENS DOSE WITHIN ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY

In this study, variations in eye lens dose across different types of protective operator eyewear as well as the most appropriate protective methods when conducting endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were evaluated. The eye lens doses of 10 types of commercially available protective eyewear were compared. The ratio of the measured value near the eye to the measured value at the eye lens position ranged from 0.65 to 5.40 and it varied according to the mounting position of the dosemeter as well as the type of protective eyewear. Thus, the eye lens dose may have been overestimated or underestimated. Regardless of the working conditions, a face shield type of protective eyewear is recommended to reduce the eye lens dose. Moreover, it is preferable to attach a lens dosemeter near the eye to measure and evaluate the eye lens dose.

The practice of radiation protection in an interventional neuroradiology service

Introduction

Interventional neuroradiology procedures subject professionals who work in this area to high doses of ionizing radiation, and such exposure leads to a higher chance of occupational diseases related to this physical risk. Radiation protection practices aim to reduce the occurrence of such damage to the health of these workers.

Objectives

To identify how the practice of radiation protection occurs in a multidisciplinary team of an interventional neuroradiology service in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil.

Methods

A qualitative, exploratory, and descriptive research conducted with nine health professionals from the multidisciplinary team. Non-participant observation and a survey form were used as data collection techniques. For data analysis, descriptive analysis based on absolute and relative frequency and content analysis were used.

Results

Although some practices showed the use of radiation protection measures in practice, such as workers taking turns to perform procedures and continuous use of the lead apron as well as the mobile suspended protection, we found that most of the practices violate the principles of radiation protection. Among these inadequate radiological protection practices, the following aspects were observed: not wearing lead goggles, not using collimation to obtain the image, poor knowledge of the principles of radiation protection and biological effects of ionizing radiation, and non-use of an individual dosimeter.

Conclusions

There was a lack of know-how of the multidisciplinary team working in interventional neuroradiology regarding the practice of radiation protection.

Radiation exposure in the endovascular therapy of cranial and spinal dural arteriovenous fistula in the last decade: a retrospective, single-center observational study

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) in the endovascular therapy (EVT) of patients with cranial and spinal dural arteriovenous fistula (dAVF).

METHODS

In a retrospective study design, DRLs and achievable dose (AD) were assessed for all patients with cranial and spinal dAVF undergoing EVT (I) or diagnostic angiography (II). All procedures were performed at the flat-panel angiography-system Allura Xper (Philips Healthcare). Interventional procedures were differentiated according to the region of fistula and the type of procedure.

RESULTS

In total, 264 neurointerventional procedures of 131 patients with dAVF (94 cranial, 37 spinal) were executed between 02/2010 and 12/2020. The following DRLs, AD, and mean values could be determined: for cranial dAVF (I) DRL 507.33 Gy cm2, AD 369.79 Gy cm2, mean 396.51 Gy cm2; (II) DRL 256.65 Gy cm2, AD 214.19 Gy cm2, mean 211.80 Gy cm2; for spinal dAVF (I) DRL 482.72 Gy cm2, AD 275.98 Gy cm2, mean 347.12 Gy cm2; (II) DRL 396.39 Gy cm2, AD 210.57 Gy cm2, mean 299.55 Gy cm2. Dose levels of EVT were significantly higher compared to diagnostic angiographies (p < 0.001). No statistical difference in dose levels regarding the localization of dAVF was found.

CONCLUSION

Our results could be used for establishing DRLs in the EVT of cranial and spinal dAVF. Because radiation exposure to comparably complex interventions such as AVM embolization is similar, it may be useful to determine general DRLs for both entities together.

Radiation Exposure During Diagnostic and Therapeutic Angiography of Carotid-cavernous Fistula : A Retrospective Single Center Observational Study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine local diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) during endovascular diagnostics and therapy of carotid-cavernous fistulas (CCF).

Methods

In a retrospective study design, DRLs, achievable dose (AD) and mean values were assessed for all patients with CCF undergoing diagnostic angiography (I) or embolization (II). All procedures were performed with the flat-panel angiography system Allura Xper (Philips Healthcare). Interventional procedures were differentiated according to the type of CCF and the type of procedure.

Results

In total, 86 neurointerventional procedures of 48 patients with CCF were executed between February 2010 and July 2021. The following DRLs, AD and mean values could be determined: (I) DRL 215 Gy ∙ cm², AD 169 Gy ∙ cm², mean 165 Gy ∙ cm²; (II) DRL 350 Gy ∙ cm², AD 226 Gy ∙ cm², mean 266 Gy ∙ cm². Dose levels of embolization were significantly higher compared to diagnostic angiography (p < 0.001). No significant dose difference was observed with respect to the type of fistula or the embolization method.

Conclusion

This article reports on diagnostic and therapeutic DRLs in the management of CCF that could serve as a benchmark for the national radiation protection authorities. Differentiation by fistula type or embolization method does not seem to be useful.

A Closer Look on Nuclear Radiation Shielding Properties of Eu3+ Doped Heavy Metal Oxide Glasses: Impact of Al2O3/PbO Substitution

In this study, a group of heavy metal oxide glasses with a nominal composition of 55B₂O₃ + 19.5TeO₂ + 10K₂O + (15−x) PbO + xAl₂O₃ + 0.5Eu₂O₃ (where x = 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, and 15 in wt.%) were investigated in terms of their nuclear radiation shielding properties. These glasses containing lanthanide-doped heavy metal oxide were envisioned to yield valuable results in respect to radiation shielding, and thus a detailed investigation was carried out; the obtained results were compared with traditional and new generation shields. Advanced simulation and theoretical methods have been utilized in a wide range of energy regions. Our results showed that the AL0.0 sample with the highest PbO contribution had superior shielding properties in the entire energy range. The effective removal of cross-sections for fast neutrons (Σ_R) was also examined. The results indicated that AL5.0 had the greatest value. While increasing the concentration of Al₂O₃ in samples had a negative effect on the radiation shielding characteristics, it can be concluded that using PbO in the Eu³⁺ doped heavy metal oxide glasses could be a useful tool to keep gamma-ray shielding properties at a maximum level.

Occupational eye lens dose in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography using a dedicated eye lens dosimeter

Increased x-ray exposure to physicians' eye lenses during radiology procedures is a significant concern. In this study, x-ray exposure to the eye was measured using an anthropomorphic head phantom, with and without radiation-protective devices, to examine the dose of x-ray radiation that physicians are exposed to during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). X-ray exposure of the eye was measured using novel dedicated direct eye lens dosimeters that could specifically measureH_p(3) during the ERCP procedure. The spatial dose in the height direction of the physician was measured using an ionization chamber dosimeter. Eye dosimeters were attached inside and outside the lead (Pb) glasses attached to the head of the human phantom to demonstrate its protective effect. Irradiation from the system lasted for 30 min. When the overcouch x-ray tube system is used, the cumulative radiation dose over the 30 min x-ray fluoroscopy time, without the use of radiation-protective devices, to the left and right eyes was 3.7 and 1.5 mSv, respectively. This dose was estimated to be the dose to the lens per therapeutic ERCP examination. With radiation-protective glasses, the dose reduced to 1.8 and 1.0 mSv for the left and right eye, respectively. The results of our study indicated that radiation exposure to the eye was reduced by up to 80.0% using Pb glasses and by 96.8% using radiation-protective curtains. Our study indicates that a physician's maximum radiation exposure to the eyes during an ERCP procedure may be above the level recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection when the physician does not use radiation-protective devices. The eyewear, which is larger and fitted more closely to the face, provided a better protection effect even with a low lead equivalence, demonstrating that the shape of eyewear is important for protective function.

Review of experimental estimates for the protection afforded by eyewear for interventional x-ray staff

This paper attempts to systematise all published experimental results for the dose reduction factor (DRF) offered by leaded eyewear on clinicians performing interventional procedures. We aim to present a comprehensive analysis of the issue and a comparison of the various equipment models at different exposure geometries. The main purpose of the paper is, however, to clarify the best choice for the DRF within the possible diverse contexts and approaches to eye lens dose assessment. Evidence has been obtained that the lowest estimates of DRF are associated with larger scatter incidence angles and that, except for the slightly better performance exhibited by wraparound eyeglasses, there is no real distinction between the DRFs for the different equipment categories. The dataset as a whole confirms that, when measurements for the concerned eyewear model and irradiation conditions are unattainable, assuming DRF = 2 represents an adequately conservative choice. Nonetheless, this value includes only 17% of all results from the literature, whereas their histogram follows a distribution skewed towards higher values, represented by a median equal to 5. Therefore, if more realistic dose reconstructions are necessary, such as for purposes of epidemiological investigations or compensation decisions, the adoption of this central tendency index appears to be more reasonable. The complexity of characterising the DRF behaviour as a function of the various exposure factors reinforces the consideration of a statistical approach to eye lens dose assessment as a viable alternative. In this perspective, assuming for DRF a lognormal distribution with parameters [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] which has been verified to satisfactorily approximate the literature data distribution, should be deemed to be an appropriate option.

The new lens dose limit: implication for occupational radiation protection

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article was to explore the implications of the new Euratom dose limit for occupational radiation protection in the context of medical occupational radiation exposures. The European Directive 2013/59/Euratom takes into account the new recommendations on reduction in the dose limit for the lens of the eye for planned occupational exposures released in 2012 by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP 118).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Different dose-monitoring procedures and devices were considered. Occupational eye lens doses reported by previous studies were analyzed, mainly considering workers involved in interventional procedures with X-rays. The current status of eye lens radiation protection and the main methods for dose reduction were investigated.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that the workers, potentially exceeding the new limit, are clinical staff performing interventional procedures with a relatively high X-ray dose. Regarding radiological protection issues, the considered literature reports that the proper use of personal protective equipment may reduce the eye lens absorbed dose.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of the occupational eye lens dose is essential to establish which method of personal dose monitoring should be preferred. Furthermore, education and training about the right use of personal protective equipment are important for medical staff working with ionizing radiation.

The Efficacy of Shielding Systems for Reducing Operator Exposure during Neurointerventional Procedures: A Real-World Prospective Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Neurointerventional surgery may expose patients and physician operators to substantial amounts of ionizing radiation. Although strategies for reducing patient exposure have been explored in the medical literature, there has been relatively little published in regards to decreasing operator exposure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of shielding systems in reducing physician exposure in a modern neurointerventional practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Informed consent was obtained from operators for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study. Operator radiation exposure was prospectively measured during 60 consecutive neurointerventional procedures from October to November 2013 using a 3-part lead shielding system. Exposure was then evaluated without lead shielding in a second 60-procedure block from April to May 2014. A radiation protection drape was randomly selected for use in half of the cases in each block. Two-way analysis of covariance was performed to test the effect of shielding systems on operator exposure while controlling for other covariates, including procedure dose-area product.

RESULTS

Mean operator procedure dose was 20.6 μSv for the entire cohort and 17.7 μSv when using some type of shielding. Operator exposure significantly correlated with procedure dose-area product, but not with other covariates. After we adjusted for procedure dose-area product, the use of lead shielding or a radiation protection drape significantly reduced operator exposure by 45% (F = 12.54, P < .0001) and 29% (F = 7.02, P = .009), respectively. The difference in protection afforded by these systems was not statistically significant (P = .46), and their adjunctive use did not provide additional protection.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive lead shielding should be used as much as possible in neurointerventional surgery to reduce operator radiation exposure to acceptable levels. A radiation protection drape is a reasonable alternative when standard lead shielding is unavailable or impractical to use without neglecting strategies to minimize the dose.

Radiation Exposure during Neurointerventional Procedures in Modern Biplane Angiographic Systems: A Single-Site Experience

Background and Purpose

Per the ALARA principle, reducing the dose delivered to both patients and staff must be a priority for endovascular therapists, who should monitor their own practice. We evaluated patient exposure to radiation during common neurointerventions performed with a recent flat-panel detector angiographic system and compared our results with those of recently published studies.

Methods

All consecutive patients who underwent a diagnostic cerebral angiography or intervention on 2 modern flat-panel detector angiographic biplane systems (Innova IGS 630, GE Healthcare, Chalfont St Giles, UK) from February to November 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Dose-area product (DAP), cumulative air kerma (CAK) per plane, fluoroscopy time (FT), and total number of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) frames were collected, reported as median (interquartile range), and compared with the previously published literature.

Results

A total of 755 consecutive cases were assessed in our institution during the study period, including 398 diagnostic cerebral angiographies and 357 interventions. The DAP (Gy × cm²), fontal and lateral CAK (Gy), FT (min), and total number of DSA frames were as follows: 43 (33-60), 0.26 (0.19-0.33), 0.09 (0.07-0.13), 5.6 (4.2-7.5), and 245 (193-314) for diagnostic cerebral angiographies, and 66 (41-110), 0.46 (0.25-0.80), 0.18 (0.10-0.30), 18.3 (9.1-30.2), and 281 (184-427) for interventions.

Conclusion

Our diagnostic cerebral angiography group had a lower median and was in the 75th percentile of DAP and FT when compared with the published literature. For interventions, both DAP and number of DSA frames were significantly lower than the values reported in the literature, despite a higher FT. Subgroup analysis by procedure type also revealed a lower or comparable DAP.