JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Assessment of Occupational Dose to the Staff of Interventional Radiology Using Monte Carlo Simulations
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Assessment of Occupational Dose to the Staff of Interventional Radiology Using Monte Carlo Simulations
Lim, Young-Khi;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Medical operations and diagnosis using interventional radiology techniques have been increased. The management and monitoring of occupational radiation exposure to the staff of interventional radiology become important, specially because they stand in close proximity to the patient. The operational radiation protection quantity, Hp(10) which can be obtained from personal dosimeter do not always represent the effective dose to the staff. So, in this study, to estimate the critical organ doses to the staff of interventional radiology, Monte Carlo calculations with mathematical human phantom and dose measurements with personal dosimeters were carried out for the major interventional radiology procedures using C-arm. Results showed that the values of Hp(10) measured by personal dosimeters were higher than critical organ doses which were calculated. And the calculated dose to thyroids was much higher than those of other critical organ doses. For the proper radiation protection of the medical staff of interventional radiology, additional radiation protection for thyroids as well as for whole body shielding like wearing a lead apron should be considered.
 Keywords
Interventional radiology;Occupational exposure;Monte Carlo calculation;Radiation protection;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
International Commission on Radiological Protection. Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures. ICRP Publication 85. Oxford; Pergamon Press. 2000.

2.
Internal Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Radiation quantities and units. ICRU Report 33. 1980.

3.
Faulkner K, Marshall NW. The relationship of effective dose to personnel and monitor reading for simulated fluoroscopic irradiation conditions. Health Physics. 1993;64(5):502-508. crossref(new window)

4.
Stern SH, Rosenstein M, Renaud L, et al. Handbook of selected tisue doses for fluoroscopic and cineangiographic examination of the coronary arteries. HHS Publication FDA 1995:95-8288.

5.
International Commission on Radiological Protection. Conversion coefficients for use in radiological protection against externational radiation. ICRP Publication 74. Oxford; Pergamon Press. 1996.

6.
Kim JI Lee BI, Lim YK, et al. Physical phantom of typical Korean male for radiation protection purpose. Radaition Protection Dosimetry. 2006;118(1):131-136.

7.
Snyder WS, Ford MR, Warner GG, et al. Estimates of specific absorbed dose fraction for photon sources uniformly distributed in various organs of a heterogeneous phantom. Society of Nuclear Medicine MIRD pamphlet No. 5. revised. 1978.

8.
Cristy M. Mathematical phantoms for use in reassessment of radiation dose to Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORNL/TM-9487. 1985.

9.
Pelowitz DB. MCNPX user's manual version 2.6.0. Los Alomas National Laboratory LA-CP-07-1473. 2008.

10.
Cranley K, Gilmore BJ, Fogarty WA, et al. Catologue of diagnostic x-ray spectra and other data. The Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine Report No. 78. 1997.

11.
Padovani R, Foti C, Malisan MR. Staff dosimetry protocols in interventional radiology. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 2001;94:193-196. crossref(new window)

12.
McEwan AC. Assessment of Occupational Exposure in New Zealand from Personal Monitoring Records. Radiation Protection in Australasia. 2000;17:60-66.