How to Measure/Calculate Radiation Dose in Patients?
Journal
Cardiovascular and interventional radiology
ISSN: 1432-086X
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003538
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
22
10
2020
accepted:
12
01
2021
pubmed:
5
3
2021
medline:
13
7
2021
entrez:
4
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patients in fluoroscopically guided interventions (FGI) may be exposed to substantial radiation dose levels (SRDL). The most commonly reported adverse reactions are skin injuries with erythema or necrosis. It is therefore important for the interventional radiologist to know deterministic effects with their threshold doses. If possible all relevant modality parameters should be displayed on the interventionalists screen. Dosimetric parameters should be displayed in digital imaging and communications in medicine (DICOM) units and stored as DICOM Radiation Dose Structured Report (RDSR). The peak skin dose (PSD) is the most relevant risk parameter for skin injuries. Dose management systems (DMS) help optimising radiation exposure of patients. However, their calculation of skin dose maps is only available after a FGI. Therefore, dose maps and PSD should preferably be calculated and displayed in real time by the modality.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33660065
doi: 10.1007/s00270-021-02772-x
pii: 10.1007/s00270-021-02772-x
pmc: PMC8172405
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
835-841Références
Chaikh A, Gaudu A, Balosso J. Monitoring methods for skin dose in interventional radiology. Int J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2015;3(1):03011. https://doi.org/10.14319/ijcto.0301.1 .
doi: 10.14319/ijcto.0301.1
ICRP Publication 120 (2013) International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiological protection in cardiology. Ann ICRP. 42 (1): 1–125
Sechopoulos I, Trianni A, Peck D. The DICOM Radiation Dose Structured Report: What It Is and What It Is Not. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12(7):712–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.04.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.04.002
pubmed: 26143564
Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/59/oj (last access 06 January 2021)
European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2015) Summary of the European Directive 2013/59/Euratom: Essentials for Health Professionals in Radiology. Insights Imaging. 6: 411–417
Loose RW, Vano E, Mildenberger P, et al. Radiation dose management systems – requirements and recommendations for users from the ESR EuroSafe Imaging initiative. Eur Radiol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07290-x .
doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07290-x
pubmed: 32959080
pmcid: 7979596
Panuccio G, Greenberg R, Wunderle K, et al. Comparison of indirect radiation dose estimates with directly measured radiation dose for patients and operators during complex endovascular procedures. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53(4):885–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2010.10.106 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.10.106
pubmed: 21292431
Stecker M, Balter S, Towbin R, et al. Guidelines for Patient Radiation Dose Management. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20:263–73.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2009.04.037
International Electrotechnical Commission. Report 60601-2-43:2010 Medical electrical equipment – part 2–43: Particular requirements for the safety and essential performance of X-ray equipment for interventional procedures. Geneva, Switzerland: IEC; 2010.
Petoussi-Henss N, Zankl M, Drexler G, et al. Calculation of backscatter factors for diagnostic radiology using Monte Carlo methods. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43:2237–50.
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/43/8/017
Tsapaki V, Tsalafoutas IA, Chinofoti I, et al. Radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations: a comparison between two methods. The British Journal of Radiology. 2007;80:107–12.
doi: 10.1259/bjr/87150291
Sharma R, Sharma SD, Pawar S, et al. Radiation dose to patients from X-ray radiographic examinations using computed radiography imaging system. J Med Phys. 2015;40(1):29–37.
doi: 10.4103/0971-6203.152244
Jones AK, Pasciak AS (2011) Calculating the peak skin dose resulting from fluoroscopically guided interventions. Part I: Methods. Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 12 (4): 231–244
Malchair F, Dabin J, Deleu M, et al. Review of skin dose calculation software in interventional cardiology. Physica Med. 2020;80:75–83.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.09.023
Tapiovaara M, Siiskonen T. PCXMC: A Monte Carlo program for calculating patient doses in medical X-ray examinations (2nd ed). Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety, Report STUK-A231. (Helsinki, Finland, 2008). https://www.stuk.fi/palvelut/pcxmc-a-monte-carlo-program-for-calculating-patient-doses-in-medical-x-ray-examinations (last access 06 January 2021)
ICRP, 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. Ann. ICRP 21 (1–3)
ICRP, 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2–4)
ICRP Publication 121 (2013) Radiological protection in paediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology. Ann ICRP. 42 (2): 1–63.
Balter S, Rosenstein M, Miller D, et al. Patient radiation dose audits for fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures. Med Phys. 2011;38(3):1611–8. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3557868 .
doi: 10.1118/1.3557868
pmcid: 3064683
Jaschke W, Bartal G, Martin CJ, Vano E. Unintended and Accidental Exposures, Significant Dose Events and Trigger Levels in Interventional Radiology. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020;43(8):1114–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02517-2 .
doi: 10.1007/s00270-020-02517-2
pubmed: 32435834
pmcid: 7369256