Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study: part II: skin dose

PURPOSE: To determine peak skin dose (PSD), a measure of the likelihood of radiation-induced skin effects, for a variety of common interventional radiology and interventional neuroradiology procedures, and to identify procedures associated with a PSD greater than 2 Gy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational study was conducted at seven academic medical centers in the United States. Sites prospectively contributed demographic and radiation dose data for subjects undergoing 21 specific procedures in a fluoroscopic suite equipped with built-in dosimetry capability. Comprehensive physics evaluations and periodic consistency checks were performed on each unit to verify the stability and consistency of the dosimeter. Seven of 12 fluoroscopic suites in the study were equipped with skin dose mapping software. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, skin dose data were recorded for 800 instances of 21 interventional radiology procedures. Wide variation in PSD was observed for different instances of the same procedure. Some instances of each procedure we studied resulted in a PSD greater than 2 Gy, except for nephrostomy, pulmonary angiography, and inferior vena cava filter placement. Some instances of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation, renal/visceral angioplasty, and angiographic diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal hemorrhage produced PSDs greater than 3 Gy. Some instances of hepatic chemoembolization, other tumor embolization, and neuroembolization procedures in the head and spine produced PSDs greater than 5 Gy. In a subset of 709 instances of higher-dose procedures, there was good overall correlation between PSD and cumulative dose (r = 0.86; P <.000001) and between PSD and dose-area-product (r = 0.85, P <.000001), but there was wide variation in these relationships for individual instances. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantial variations in PSD among instances of the same procedure and among different procedure types. Most of the procedures observed may produce a PSD sufficient to cause deterministic effects in skin. It is suggested that dose data be recorded routinely for TIPS creation, angioplasty in the abdomen or pelvis, all embolization procedures, and especially for head and spine embolization procedures. Measurement or estimation of PSD is the best method for determining the likelihood of radiation-induced skin effects. Skin dose mapping is preferable to a single-point measurement of PSD.     

Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR Study. Part III: Dosimetric performance of the interventional fluoroscopy units

PURPOSE: To present the physics data supporting the validity of the clinical dose data from the RAD-IR study and to document the performance of dosimetry-components of these systems over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sites at seven academic medical centers in the United States prospectively contributed data for each of 12 fluoroscopic units. All units were compatible with International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard 60601-2-43. Comprehensive evaluations and periodic consistency checks were performed to verify the performance of each unit's dosimeter. Comprehensive evaluations compared system performance against calibrated ionization chambers under nine combinations of operating conditions. Consistency checks provided more frequent dosimetry data, with use of each unit's built-in dosimetry equipment and a standard water phantom. RESULTS: During the 3-year study, data were collected for 48 comprehensive evaluations and 581 consistency checks. For the comprehensive evaluations, the mean (95% confidence interval range) ratio of system to external measurements was 1.03 (1.00-1.05) for fluoroscopy and 0.93 (0.90-0.96) for acquisition. The expected ratio was 0.93 for both. For consistency checks, the values were 1.00 (0.98-1.02) for fluoroscopy and 1.00 (0.98-1.02) for acquisition. Each system was compared across time to its own mean value. Overall uncertainty was estimated by adding the standard deviations of the comprehensive and consistency measurements in quadrature. The authors estimate that the overall error in clinical cumulative dose measurements reported in RAD-IR is 24%. CONCLUSION: Dosimetric accuracy was well within the tolerances established by IEC standard 60601-2-43. The clinical dose data reported in the RAD-IR study are valid.     

平板DSA介入检查治疗患者的剂量调查

目的 调查平板数字减影血管造影(DSA)介入检查治疗患者的照射剂量,分析影响患者照射剂量的因素.方法 收集2009年3至6月来本院做DSA检查治疗的患者461例,手术种类包括全脑血管造影(CEA)、颅内动脉瘤弹簧圈栓塞(CAE)、肝脏动脉造影+超选化疗(SHAC)、冠状动脉造影(COA)、冠状动脉支架植入(PISI)、心脏射频消融(RFCA)、永久起搏器安装(PCPI).通过采集所有病例的剂量面积值(DAP)、累计皮肤表面人射剂量(CAK)、透视时间,采用转换因子计算有效剂量值.结果 CEA、CAE、SHAC、COA、PIST、RFCA、PCPI的有效剂量当量分别为(0.33±0.20)、(0.49±0.35)、(6.92±4.19)、(0.76±0.91)、(2.35±1.47)、(0.50±0.74)和(0.67±0.70)Sv;461例患者中超过1 Sv的达到120人次,占26%,超过10 Sv的达到10人次,均为SHAC患者.CAK分另为(0.55±0.43)、(1.34±1.11)、(0.95±0.57)、(0.32±0.31)、(0.91±0.33)、(0.16±0.22)和(0.15±0.14)Gy,CAK值超过1 Gy共为59例,占12.8%,超过2 Gy为11例,占2.4%,有2例超过3 Gy,为4.5和6.1 Gy,分别为CEA和CAE患者.结论 各项介入手术患者所受照射剂量个体差异较大.介入检查治疗患者接受的照射剂量较高,需要进行严格的监督以保证患者照射剂量得到最佳控制.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate the radiation doses for the patients undergoing interventional radiology and to analyze the dose - influencing factors.MethodsThe clinical data of 461 patients undergoing interventional radiology,including cerebral angiography ( CEA ),cerebral aneurysm embolism ( CAE ),superselective hepatic arterial chemoembolization ( SHAG ),coronary angiography ( COA ),percutaneous intracoronary stent implantation ( PIS1 ),cardiac radiofrequency catheter ablation ( RFCA ),and permanent cardiac pacemaker implantation(PCPI) were collected to observe the cumulative air kerma (CAK),dose area product (DAP),and fluoroscopy time,and effective dose was estimated using the conversion factors.Results The effective doses for CEA,CAE,SHAG,COA,PISI,RFCA,and PCPI were (0.33 ±0.20),(0.49 ±0.35),(6.92 ±4.19),(0.76 ±0.91),(2.35 ± 1.47),(0.50 ±0.74),and (0.67 ±0.70) Sv,respectively.In 126 of the 416 patients (26%),the effective doses were greater than 1 Sv,and the effective doses of 10 person-times were greater than 10 Sv,all of which were observed in the patients undergoing SHAG.The CAK values for CEA,CAE,SHAG,COA,PISI,RFCA,and PCPIwere (0.55 ±0.43),(1.34 ± 1.11),(0.95 ±0.57),(0.32 ±0.31),(0.91 ±0.33),(0.16 ±0.22),and (0.15 ±0.14) Gy,respectively.The CAK values were greater than 1 Gy in 59 of the 461 patients ( 12.8% ),greater than 2 Gy in 11 cases (2.4%) ,and greater than 3 Gy in 1 CEA cases and 1 CEA case,respectively.Conclusions There is a wide variation range in radiation dose for different procedures.As most interventional radiology procedure can result in clinically significant radiation dose to the patient,stricter dose control should be carried out.     

介入放射学诊疗过程患者受照剂量及防护措施

介入放射学在过去20多年来得到迅速的发展,新的技术和影像监视手段也获得不断的进步,其在临床上的应用日益广泛,给患者带来了巨大的利益。与此同时,介入放射学对患者的高辐射剂量也引起了许多国家放射学界的密切关注,开展了很多对患者的辐射剂量测量以及防护措施的研究,并提出了很多有价值的建议。     

放射性介入操作中辐射剂量与防护措施

由放射性介入操作所导致的辐射剂量已引起人们越来越多的关注,尤其是考虑到该项操作的频率不断增加和日趋复杂化。现有研究的主要集中于三个方面:目前放射性介入操作中的剂量水平、操作人员和患者的辐射危险以及辐射防护措施。     

Radiation dose in interventional fluoroscopic procedures.

Vascular interventional procedures carried out under fluoroscopic guidance often involve high radiation doses. Above certain thresholds, radiation can cause significant damage to the skin including hair loss and severe necrosis. Such damage has been reported by several investigators. Many attempts have been made to quantitate the radiation doses to the skin involved with these procedures, but dosimetry methods are often flawed. To improve the situation better monitoring of radiation doses, fluoroscopist education, and changes in technology and methods are needed.     

10种介入诊疗程序中患者的辐射剂量调查

目的 调查研究介入诊疗程序中患者的受照剂量,评估其放射诊疗风险.方法 利用配置有符合IEC 60601-2标准的穿透型电离室的飞利浦Allura Xper FD20 DSA系统,收集记录10种介入诊疗程序共198例患者的剂量参数,估算出可供评估皮肤损伤的最高皮肤剂量及有效剂量.结果 累计透视时间范围为2.1～80.9 min,摄影帧数范围为15～678帧,剂量面积乘积范围为11～825 Gy·cm2,累计剂量范围为24～3374 mGy.有16例患者最高皮肤剂量超过1 Gy,79例患者有效剂量大于20 mSv.结论 有部分病例的最高皮肤剂量超过了皮肤损伤阈值,所以对患者的放射防护应给予足够的重枧.

Abstract：

Objective To investigate radiation dose to the patients undergoing interventional radiology and make radiation risk assessment.Methods Data was collected on 198 instances of 10 interventional radiology procedures by using Philips Allura Xper FD20 DSA, which was equipped with the transparent ionization chamber system in compliance with IEC 60601-2.Patient peak skin dose and effective dose were estimated.Results Cumulative fluoroscopy time was 2.1 - 80.9 min, and number of images monitored for PSD were above 1 Gy and 79 cases monitored for E were above 20 mSv.Conclusions Substantial number of cases exceeded the dose threshold for erythema.Due attention should be paid to radiation protection of patients.     

Method of patient dose evaluation in the angiographic and interventional radiology procedures

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effective dose in interventional radiology and angiography procedures on the basis of the dose-area product (DAP), either measured or calculated using two different methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 2072 examinations carried out on several X-ray systems both in angiography and in interventional radiology. Some of the systems were equipped with an on-board transmission chamber for DAP measurements; for these systems we took direct DAP measurements for each type of examination. For the systems without the dose measurement device, we used a portable transmission chamber, acquiring the data from a set of sampling frames. We then derived the dose values from the systems' dosimetry data and the information about each examination. To this end, the dosimetry of each x-ray system was done by measuring tube output in the different acquisition modes, backscatter factor and field-homogeneity factor. Survey data sheets were filled in after every examination indicating the exposure data (mean Kv, mAs, focus-skin distance and field size). These values combined with the dosimetric data were used to evaluate the DAP for each exam. Where possible, we compared the measured and calculated DAP values by assessing the percentage deviation between each pair of values. A similar comparison was made for the single examinations using a simplified calculation algorithm reported in the literature. For all the examinations for which we had adequate survey data sheets, we estimated the DAP and the entrance dose values and, with the aid of WinODS software, the effective dose. RESULTS: The direct measurements of DAP showed that, in interventional radiology and angiographic procedures, the variability in examination conditions leads to a wide range of possible patient doses even within the same examination type.The comparison between the measured and calculated DAP using our algorithm showed substantial agreement (mean difference 30%, maximum 80%). By contrast, using the algorithm proposed in the literature, we obtained deviations higher than 100%.An estimate of the effective dose for all the recorded examinations (2072) permitted evaluation of both magnitude and variability of patient doses in special radiology procedures such as angiography and interventional radiology. However, it should be noted that evaluations based on calculated DAP values may be as uncertain as those estimated for DAP, and that clearly the evaluations made for the examinations for which direct measurements are available are more accurate.In particularly 'invasive' examinations in terms of entrance dose, where the threshold limits for deterministic effects might possibly be exceeded, the equivalent doses to critical organs were also assessed. This analysis showed that in a small percentage of patients (5%) 2 Gy to the skin was exceeded in the areas exposed with possible transient erythema, while in fewer than 2% of patients, the 3 Gy limit for temporary epilation was exceeded. CONCLUSIONS: Many interventional radiology, especially haemodynamic, examinations have shown to give significant exposure to patients. The direct dose measurement method has shown to be the only method able to provide reliable information on such exposure.However, the authors believe that since the patient dose cannot be established in advance, even in terms of magnitude and since direct dose measurement cannot be performed on all patients, it is nonetheless interesting to be able to assess, at least semiqualitatively, the amount of the above doses.     

心血管病介入操作时患者受照剂量研究

目的 对心血管介入手术中患者所受辐射剂量及与辐射剂量相关的指标进行采集和分析,为改善患者的辐射防护提供依据.方法 对在省属三级甲等医院进行的26例完整的心血管介入手术的患者进行临床数据采集,按手术类别分成冠状动脉血管造影术(CA)及行冠状动脉血管造影术(CA)后继续行经皮穿刺腔内冠状动脉成形术(PTCA)两组,采用TLD个人剂量计照射野矩阵测量法,检测患者荧光照射时间、入射皮肤剂量(ESD)、最高皮肤剂量(PSD)、剂量-面积乘积(DAP)等指标,用TLD测量在模拟心血管手术条件下体模器官剂量.结果 荧光透视时间为(17.7±15.6)min,范围为0.80～42.4 min;ESD范围为(159±138)mGy,4.40～459 mGy;PSD范围为(769±705)mGy,22.6～2.43×103mGy.CA+PTCA组的荧光照射时间、ESD、PSD均大于CA组,差异有统计学意义.最大皮肤受照剂量与透视时间有较好的相关性(r=0.84,P＜0.01).结论 心血管病放射性介入操作时,可通过透视时间来估算最大皮肤受照剂量.

Abstract：

Objective To collect and analyze the radiation dose to patients in cardiovascular interventional procedures and the radiation dose-related indicators,in order to provide a basis for improving radiation protection of patients.MethodsThe clinical data of 26 cases of complete cardiovascular interventional procedures was collected in the municipal Grade A Class Three hospitals,including coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA),and the patient-received radiation doses and other related factors was studied.TLD personal dosimeter radiation field matrix method was used to measure fluorescence time,the entrance skin dose (ESD),the peak skin dose (PSD),dosearea product (DAP) and other indicators.TLD was used to measure the organ dose of the phantom under the cardiovascular interventional procedure condition.ResultsThe fluoroscopy time was (17.7 ±15.6) min during the range of 0.80-42.4 min.The average entrance skin dose (ESD) was (159 ± 138)mGy during the range of 4.40-459 mGy.The peak skin dose (PSD) was (769 ± 705) mGy during the range of 22.6 - 2.43 × 103mGy.The fluorescence time,entrance skin dose (ESD) ,peak skin dose (PSD) of the group CA + PTCA are greater than the group CA and the difference has statistical significan.The peak skin dose and the fluoroscopy time have good linear correlation (r = 0.84,P ＜ 0.01 ).Conclusion The peak skin dose the patient received in cardiovascular interventional radiological operation can be estimated through the fluoroscopy time.     

Radiation dose management: part 1, minimizing radiation dose in CT-guided procedures

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to discuss radiation dose during CT-guided interventions and to explain how radiologists can modify technical factors to minimize radiation doses. Scanner-displayed indexes of radiation exposure that are available during the procedure will be defined to increase awareness about CT radiation dose reduction during interventional procedures. CONCLUSION: CT-guided fluoroscopic procedures are safe and effective methods of directed intervention; however, the increasing use of medical radiation is an important consideration. The appropriate use of imaging with an acceptable risk must be considered in every case. During CT-guided interventions, scanner parameters that can be used as a guide for effective dose management, including the CT dose index and dose-length product, are readily displayed. These parameters can be adjusted by modifying the longitudinal scan length, number of scans, and tube current-exposure time product (milliampere × second [mAs]). A team approach to radiation dose reduction will work the best.     

CT引导介入操作中患者有效辐射剂量的研究

目的探讨CT引导下各类介入操作中患者接受的有效辐射剂量。方法回顾性分析近2年来我科CT引导下介入诊断和治疗259例次患者的检查资料。介入操作包括穿刺活检、引流、射频消融、经皮瘤内无水乙醇注射术、放射性¹²⁵Ⅰ粒子植入术、腹腔神经丛阻滞术等6种方法。浏览PCAS系统上的医学信息和图像,并记录患者所接受的介入诊疗方式、扫描时间、扫描次数、总毫安秒、CT剂量指数、剂量长度乘积。有效辐射剂量根据国际放射防护委员会（ICRP）制定的蒙特卡罗有效剂量转换公式进行计算。结果放射性¹²⁵Ⅰ粒子植入术、经皮瘤内无水乙醇注射术、射频消融术、腹腔神经丛阻滞术、引流、活检平均有效辐射剂量分别是（25.62±10.43）mSv、（19.02±7.35）mSv、（18.69±6.39）mSv、（16.22±5.60）mSv、（10.66±4.51）mSv和（9.67±3.81）mSv,粒子植入术的有效辐射量明显高于其他介入操作,差异有统计学意义。结论 CT引导下单次介入操作有效辐射剂量相对较小,引起辐射损伤及后续并发症的危险小,但多次介入治疗累积的有效辐射剂量可能会较大,需要引起一定的重视。     

Radiation risks in interventional radiology

The number, diversity and complexity of interventional radiological examinations have all increased markedly in recent years, and it is widely recognized that some of these procedures carry greater risks than many other radiological procedures. This Commentary uses a meeting on "Radiation Protection in Interventional Radiology" held at the British Institute of Radiology on 28 March 2007 as a template to discuss recent progress in this area, some current problems and plans for the future.     

Radiation protection in interventional radiology

There is growing concern regarding the radiation dose delivered during interventional procedures, particularly in view of the increasing frequency and complexity of these techniques. This paper reviews the radiation dose levels currently encountered in interventional procedures, the consequent risks to operators and patients and the dose reduction that may be achieved by employing a rigorous approach to radiation protection.     

五种介入程序中职业人员手部受照剂量水平的评估

目的 评估5种临床介入程序中,职业人员手部受照剂量水平。方法 选择北京4家医院进行5种介入程序的治疗,职业人员术中左右手各佩戴1枚热释光指环剂量计（TLD,LiF：Mg,Ti）,进行手部剂量当量H_p（0.07）监测,同时分别记录患者的透视电压、透视电流、透视时间、摄影数,总累积剂量、剂量面积乘积等影响因素信息,对影响因素进行分析。结果 本研究共监测5种介入程序,119例手术。对5种介入程序中职业人员左手与右手受照剂量进行分析,差异有统计学意义（t=1.99,P<0.05）。不同介入程序的第一术者手部受照剂量左手、右手差异均有统计学意义（F=455.83、116.45,P<0.01）。影响因素分析中,随着透视管电压,透视电流,透视时间,摄影数的增加,操作者手部剂量也增加（r=0.570、0.712、0.564、0.711,P<0.05）。将上述单因素分析有统计学意义的变量引入多元线性回归方程中,采用逐步回归法拟合方程。经拟合方程为y=225.763+1.862x₁-98.125x₂（F=22.726,P<0.05）。其中变量x₁为透视时间,x₂为摄影数。表明影响操作者手部剂量的主要因素是透视时间和摄影数。结论 在开展上述5种介入程序治疗时,第一术者的手部剂量最高,其次第二术者、助手或护士;5类介入程序中,第一术者的手部受照剂量水平高低排列为心脏起搏器植入术（PM） > 射频消融（RFA） > 冠状动脉血管造影术（CA） > 支架植入术（PTCA+PCI） > 脑动脉瘤介入术（ITCA）;大量开展PM手术时,第一术者手部的年当量剂量有可能超过限值。     

Occupational radiation doses to the extremities and the eyes in interventional radiology and cardiology procedures

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine occupational dose levels in interventional radiology and cardiology procedures.

Methods

The study covered a sample of 25 procedures and monitored occupational dose for all laboratory personnel. Each individual wore eight thermoluminescent dosemeters next to the eyes, wrists, fingers and legs during each procedure. Radiation protection shields used in each procedure were recorded.

Results

The highest doses per procedure were recorded for interventionists at the left wrist (average 485 μSv, maximum 5239 μSv) and left finger (average 324 μSv, maximum 2877 μSv), whereas lower doses were recorded for the legs (average 124 μSv, maximum 1959 μSv) and the eyes (average 64 μSv, maximum 1129 μSv). Doses to the assisting nurses during the intervention were considerably lower; the highest doses were recorded at the wrists (average 26 μSv, maximum 41 μSv) and legs (average 18 μSv, maximum 22 μSv), whereas doses to the eyes were minimal (average 4 μSv, maximum 16 μSv). Occupational doses normalised to kerma area product (KAP) ranged from 11.9 to 117.3 μSv/1000 cGy cm² and KAP was poorly correlated to the interventionists'' extremity doses.

Conclusion

Calculation of the dose burden for interventionists considering the actual number of procedures performed annually revealed that dose limits for the extremities and the lenses of the eyes were not exceeded. However, there are cases in which high doses have been recorded and this can lead to exceeding the dose limits when bad practices are followed and the radiation protection tools are not properly used.The rapid development of imaging technology has contributed to the growth of interventional radiology (IR) in recent years [1]. Continuing advances in digital imaging have enabled new and complex operations to be implemented, such as vascular and hepatobiliary interventional procedures, that were seldom performed in the past. Improvements in catheters, guidewires and stents have contributed to worldwide popularity and expansion of IR [2, 3]. Similarly, the number of interventional cardiology (IC) procedures over the last 10 years has also increased rapidly [4]. The main reason is that IC permits specialists to avoid complicated invasive surgery, which some patients might not tolerate because of age factors or pathology, and this results in a reduced length of hospital stay in comparison with coronary artery bypass grafting [5]. However, interventional procedures can involve long fluoroscopic times, cine acquisitions and operation of fluoroscopic equipment in high-dose fluoroscopic modes, which can lead to high patient and staff doses [6, 7]. Interventional procedures require the physician and assisting personnel to remain close to the patient, which is the main source of scattered radiation. Interventionists can also be subjected to primary irradiation if, because of bad practice, their hands enter the primary X-ray beam. Doses to physicians'' lower extremities, which are closest to the X-ray tube, can also be substantial. More importantly, doses to the eyes are of particular concern when protective eyeglasses are not worn since the lens of the eye is particularly sensitive to radiation. Although the main part of the body can be individually shielded by a protective apron, the hands and legs remain almost unshielded. Thus, it is important to ensure that, for these exposed parts, the annual dose limits are not exceeded.The purpose of the present study was to determine doses to personnel in IR and IC during various diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The study concentrated on doses to the extremities and the lens of the eye for all laboratory personnel and investigated the correlation between kerma area product (KAP) and personnel doses.     

Radiation dose measurement of the patient in interventional radiology using a transmission ionization chamber

We propose a method to estimate patient radiation dose in radiologically guided interventional procedures using a transmission ionization chamber. A typical transarterial embolization (TAE) procedure for hepatocellular carcinoma was simulated, including 30 minutes of fluoroscopy and five series of DSA, each with appropriate collimation. The dose-area product was divided by the area and compared with values from a standard dosimeter placed in the center of the radiation entrance, to obtain a conversion factor. In this way, the entrance skin dose can be estimated immediately after the procedure by simply multiplying the value by the conversion factor, if the procedure roughly conforms to the simulated model. The average entrance skin dose of 33 patients who recently underwent TAE for HCC was found to be 0.66 (0.19-1.75) Gy. This technique can be applied to other areas of IVR and may help to reduce patient exposure to radiation.     

Radiation dose in dental radiology

The aim of this study was to compare radiation exposure in panoramic radiography (PR), dental CT, and digital volume tomography (DVT). An anthropomorphic Alderson-Rando phantom and two anatomical head phantoms with thermoluminescent dosimeters fixed at appropriate locations were exposed as in a dental examination. In PR and DVT, standard parameters were used while variables in CT included mA, pitch, and rotation time. Image noise was assessed in dental CT and DVT. Radiation doses to the skin and internal organs within the primary beam and resulting from scatter radiation were measured and expressed as maximum doses in mGy. For PR, DVT, and CT, these maximum doses were 0.65, 4.2, and 23 mGy. In dose-reduced CT protocols, radiation doses ranged from 10.9 to 6.1 mGy. Effective doses calculated on this basis showed values below 0.1 mSv for PR, DVT, and dose-reduced CT. Image noise was similar in DVT and low-dose CT. As radiation exposure and image noise of DVT is similar to low-dose CT, this imaging technique cannot be recommended as a general alternative to replace PR in dental radiology.