-
International Journal of Radiation... Jul 2019For more than a century, ionizing radiation has been indispensable mainly in medicine and industry. Radiation research is a multidisciplinary field that investigates... (Review)
Review
For more than a century, ionizing radiation has been indispensable mainly in medicine and industry. Radiation research is a multidisciplinary field that investigates radiation effects. Radiation research was very active in the mid- to late 20th century, but has then faced challenges, during which time funding has fluctuated widely. Here we review historical changes in funding situations in the field of radiation research, particularly in Canada, European Union countries, Japan, South Korea, and the US. We also provide a brief overview of the current situations in education and training in this field. A better understanding of the biological consequences of radiation exposure is becoming more important with increasing public concerns on radiation risks and other radiation literacy. Continued funding for radiation research is needed, and education and training in this field are also important.
Topics: Animals; Canada; European Union; History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Japan; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Radioactive Hazard Release; Radiobiology; Radiotherapy; Republic of Korea; Research; Research Support as Topic; United States
PubMed: 30601684
DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2018.1558303 -
The British Journal of Radiology Oct 2021This review summarises the current knowledge about recurrent radiological imaging and associated cumulative doses to patients. The recent conservative estimates are for... (Review)
Review
This review summarises the current knowledge about recurrent radiological imaging and associated cumulative doses to patients. The recent conservative estimates are for around 0.9 million patients globally who cumulate radiation doses above 100 mSv, where evidence exists for cancer risk elevation. Around one in five is estimated to be under the age of 50. Recurrent imaging is used for managing various health conditions and chronic diseases such as malignancies, trauma, end-stage kidney disease, cardiovascular diseases, Crohn's disease, urolithiasis, cystic pulmonary disease. More studies are needed from different parts of the world to understand the magnitude and appropriateness. The analysis identified areas of future work to improve radiation protection of individuals who are submitted to frequent imaging. These include access to dose saving imaging technologies; improved imaging strategies and appropriateness process; specific optimisation tailored to the clinical condition and patient habitus; wider utilisation of the automatic exposure monitoring systems with an integrated option for individual exposure tracking in standardised patient-specific risk metrics; improved training and communication. The integration of the clinical and exposure history data will support improved knowledge about radiation risks from low doses and individual radiosensitivity. The radiation protection framework will need to respond to the challenge of recurrent imaging and high individual doses. The radiation protection perspective complements the clinical perspective, and the risk to benefit analysis must account holistically for all incidental and long-term benefits and risks for patients, their clinical history and specific needs. This is a step toward the patient-centric health care.
Topics: Diagnostic Imaging; Humans; Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Radiopharmaceuticals; Retreatment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34161167
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210477 -
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology Dec 2018It has become common for nuclear medicine technologists to assume the responsibilities, or even the role, of the radiation safety officer or associate radiation safety... (Review)
Review
It has become common for nuclear medicine technologists to assume the responsibilities, or even the role, of the radiation safety officer or associate radiation safety officer. Their responsibilities are primarily related to the radioactive materials license but increasingly can include additional safety responsibilities within the hospital. These include CT, MRI, and fluoroscopy safety. Many technologists reading this article may be interested in sitting for the radiation safety advanced certification examination by the Nuclear Medicine Technology Certification Board. A consultation of the content outline for that examination (found on the Nuclear Medicine Technology Certification Board website) is a good place to start. The content outline is quite extensive and cannot be covered within a single article.
Topics: Certification; Humans; Nuclear Medicine; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection; Safety
PubMed: 30413600
DOI: 10.2967/jnmt.118.209528 -
Radiation and Environmental Biophysics Nov 2021
Topics: Radiation Protection
PubMed: 34671853
DOI: 10.1007/s00411-021-00949-z -
Technology in Cancer Research &... Dec 2016All procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, are subject to strict regulation, and public concerns have been raised about even the low... (Review)
Review
All procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, are subject to strict regulation, and public concerns have been raised about even the low levels of radiation exposures involved in diagnostic imaging. During the last 2 decades, there are signs of more balanced attitude to ionizing radiation hazards, as opposed to the historical "radiophobia." The linear no-threshold hypothesis, based on the assumption that every radiation dose increment constitutes increased cancer risk for humans, is increasingly debated. In particular, the recent memorandum of the International Commission on Radiological Protection admits that the linear no-threshold hypothesis predictions at low doses (that International Commission on Radiological Protection itself has used and continues to use) are "speculative, unproven, undetectable, and 'phantom'." Moreover, numerous experimental, ecological, and epidemiological studies suggest that low doses of ionizing radiation may actually be beneficial to human health. Although these advances in scientific understanding have not yet yielded significant changes in radiation regulation and policy, we are hopeful such changes may happen in the relatively near future. This article reviews the present status of the low-dose radiation hazard debate and outlines potential opportunities in the field of low-dose radiation therapy.
Topics: Carcinogenesis; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Humans; Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Protection; Radiation, Ionizing; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 26391015
DOI: 10.1177/1533034615605639 -
International Journal of Radiation... 2022As part of the special issue on 'Women in Science', this review offers a perspective on past and ongoing work in the field of normal (non-cancer) tissue radiation... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
As part of the special issue on 'Women in Science', this review offers a perspective on past and ongoing work in the field of normal (non-cancer) tissue radiation biology, highlighting the work of many of the leading contributors to this field of research. We discuss some of the hypotheses that have guided investigations, with a focus on some of the critical organs considered dose-limiting with respect to radiation therapy, and speculate on where the field needs to go in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
The scope of work that makes up normal tissue radiation biology has and continues to play a pivotal role in the radiation sciences, ensuring the most effective application of radiation in imaging and therapy, as well as contributing to radiation protection efforts. However, despite the proven historical value of preclinical findings, recent decades have seen clinical practice move ahead with altered fractionation scheduling based on empirical observations, with little to no (or even negative) supporting scientific data. Given our current appreciation of the complexity of normal tissue radiation responses and their temporal variability, with tissue- and/or organ-specific mechanisms that include intra-, inter- and extracellular messaging, as well as contributions from systemic compartments, such as the immune system, the need to maintain a positive therapeutic ratio has never been more urgent. Importantly, mitigation and treatment strategies, whether for the clinic, emergency use following accidental or deliberate releases, or reducing occupational risk, will likely require multi-targeted approaches that involve both local and systemic intervention. From our personal perspective as five 'Women in Science', we would like to acknowledge and applaud the role that many female scientists have played in this field. We stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before, some of whom are fellow contributors to this special issue.
Topics: Female; Humans; Neoplasms; Radiation Protection; Radiobiology
PubMed: 34129427
DOI: 10.1080/09553002.2021.1941383 -
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine Nov 2022Fluoroscopy is used frequently during endoscopic procedures, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, exposure to radiation is an... (Review)
Review
Fluoroscopy is used frequently during endoscopic procedures, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, exposure to radiation is an important health concern, primarily because of the potential increase in the lifetime risk of malignancy. This consideration is important for patients and staff exposed to radiation during ERCP. Thus, an understanding of how radiation doses are measured during ERCP and the potential risks of this radiation is important. Additionally, staff must be educated about methods used to minimize the radiation dose, such as the use of different imaging techniques, the general principles of fluoroscopy, and advances in hardware and software. The use of personal protective equipment is also essential to minimize occupational exposure. However, no comprehensive ERCP guideline on the use of X-ray systems in clinical settings or on radiation protection for operators has been established. This review focuses on the properties of fluoroscopy systems and methods of radiation protection for physicians and assistants participating in ERCP.
Topics: Humans; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection; Radiation Exposure
PubMed: 36217814
DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2022.093 -
Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) Mar 2023Since I started my residency program in Radiology, I have been committed to promoting radiation protection, paying particular attention to the justification and...
Since I started my residency program in Radiology, I have been committed to promoting radiation protection, paying particular attention to the justification and optimization of the examinations [...].
Topics: Humans; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Radiation Exposure; Radiation Protection; Communication; Radiologists
PubMed: 37104128
DOI: 10.3390/tomography9020057 -
The British Journal of Radiology 2016The aim of this article was to explore the evidence for the revised European Union basic safety standard (BSS) radiation dose limits to the lens of the eye, in the... (Review)
Review
The aim of this article was to explore the evidence for the revised European Union basic safety standard (BSS) radiation dose limits to the lens of the eye, in the context of medical occupational radiation exposures. Publications in the open literature have been reviewed in order to draw conclusions on the exposure profiles and doses received by medical radiation workers and to bring together the limited evidence for cataract development in medical occupationally exposed populations. The current status of relevant radiation-protection and monitoring practices and procedures is also considered. In conclusion, medical radiation workers do receive high doses in some circumstances, and thus working practices will be impacted by the new BSS. However, there is strong evidence to suggest that compliance with the new lower dose limits will be possible, although education and training of staff alongside effective use of personal protective equipment will be paramount. A number of suggested actions are given with the aim of assisting medical and associated radiation-protection professionals in understanding the requirements.
Topics: Health Personnel; Humans; Lens, Crystalline; Occupational Diseases; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries; Radiation Monitoring; Radiation Protection
PubMed: 26828972
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20151034 -
RoFo : Fortschritte Auf Dem Gebiete Der... Mar 2023The evaluation of the protective effect of X-ray protective clothing requires new criteria. The current concept assumes more or less uniform covering of the torso with...
BACKGROUND
The evaluation of the protective effect of X-ray protective clothing requires new criteria. The current concept assumes more or less uniform covering of the torso with protective material. The frequently worn heavy wrap-around aprons can weigh 7 to 8 kg. As relevant studies show, orthopedic damage can result from long-term activity. It should therefore be investigated whether the apron weight can be reduced by optimizing the material distribution. For a radiobiological evaluation of the protective effect, the "effective dose" should be used.
METHODS
Numerous laboratory measurements were performed with an Alderson Rando phantom as well as dose measurements on clinical personnel. The measurements were supplemented by Monte Carlo simulation of an interventional workplace in which a female ICRP reference phantom was used for the operator. The measured back doses on the Alderson phantom as well as the measured back doses at interventional workplaces were based on the personal equivalent dose Hp(10). Monte Carlo simulations were used to introduce protection factors for the protective clothing based on the "effective dose" introduced in radiation protection.
RESULTS
Back doses in clinical radiology personnel are largely negligible. Therefore, back protection can be much lower than currently used or can even be eliminated. The Monte Carlo simulations show that the protective effect of protective aprons worn on the body is higher than when the flat protective material is radiated through (3 D effect). About 80 % of the effective dose is attributed to the body region from the gonads to the chest. By additional shielding of this area, the effective dose can be lowered or, optionally, aprons with less weight can be produced. Attention must also be paid to the "radiation leaks" (upper arms, neck, skull), which can reduce the whole-body protective effect.
CONCLUSION
In the future, the evaluation of the protective effect of X-ray protective clothing should be based on the effective dose. For this purpose, effective dose-based protection factors could be introduced, while the lead equivalent should be used for measurement purposes only. If the results are implemented, protective aprons with approx. 40 % less weight can be produced with a comparable protective effect.
KEY POINTS
· The protective effect of X-ray protective clothing should be described by protection factors based on effective dose.. · The lead equivalent should only be used for measurement purposes.. · More than 80 % of the effective dose is attributed to the body region from the gonads to the chest.. · A reinforcing layer in this area increases the protective effect considerably.. · With optimized material distribution, protective aprons could be up to 40 % lighter..
CITATION FORMAT
· Eder H. X-Ray Protective Aprons Re-Evaluated. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2023; 195: 234 - 243.
Topics: Female; Humans; Radiation Protection; Radiation Dosage; X-Rays; Radiography; Protective Clothing; Occupational Exposure
PubMed: 36796379
DOI: 10.1055/a-1994-7332