Radiation Risks and the Importance of Radiological Protection in Interventional Cardiology: A Systematic ReviewWe discuss some aspects related to the legal framework, international recommendations and training programs on radiological protection; image quality and equipment; the biological effects and risks of ionizing radiation; lesions in patients and operators; patient's reference levels; occupational dose limit and preventive actions. The use of ionizing radiation involves risks that are justified in diagnostic and therapeu tic procedures. The awareness and knowledge of these risks minimizes the damage, optimizing the quality of images and safe use of ionizing radiation. There is evidence of radiationin duced cataracts in individuals who work in catheterization laboratories. Several studies suggest there may be a significant risk of lens opacity, if radiological protection devices are not properly used. Additionally, these interventional procedures are performed in Latin America, usually by medical specialists in collaboration with nurses, technologists and technicians, who often do not have adequate training in radiological protection.
The purpose of this paper is to report a set of experimental values of patient and staff doses in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory using the range of radiographic and geometric parameters from routine clinical practice. The data obtained will be available for validation of Monte Carlo calculations and for training purposes. They will also help optimise radiation protection for patients and staff. Experimental measurements were made with an anthropomorphic phantom, and a monoplane flat detector-based X-ray system was used for interventional cardiology procedures. Standard operational protocols used in clinical practice were applied. Around 1000 patient dose and 5000 staff dose values were measured for different operational conditions (angulations, distances, collimation and wedge filter, magnification, phantom thicknesses, using Copper absorber, etc.). Uncertainties were also estimated. Increase factors of 3-10 for patients and staff doses were measured for the different C-arm angulations.
OBJETIVO: Verificar a concordância dos resultados apresentados por diferentes métodos de medida e as variações apresentadas na aplicação deles em diferentes equipamentos mamográficos. MATERIAIS E MÉTODOS: Foram realizadas 10 medidas de força de compressão para cada método proposto em cada equipamento avaliado (Mammomat 3000-Siemens, Mammo Diagnostic UC-Philips e Alpha ST-GE), sendo avaliadas as diferenças entre esses equipamentos mamográficos para aplicação dos mesmos métodos de medida e as diferenças entre os métodos aplicados. RESULTADOS: Diferenças significativas foram observadas entre os resultados para os diferentes métodos propostos, sendo o valor medido com auxílio de "balança tipo de banheiro", o que subestimou o valor da força de compressão. Cada sistema de compressão mostrou diferentes respostas para os métodos propostos. CONCLUSÃO: Diferenças foram verificadas para os sistemas de compressão e métodos utilizados. Dessa forma, a escolha do modo de realização do teste de compressão torna-se importante para aceitação de equipamentos mamográficos, e a competência para a definição do método mais adequado e realista é do responsável técnico. Sugere-se que a medida de força de compressão seja realizada com auxílio de dinamômetro de extensão e não de compressão se não se conhece o funcionamento do sistema de compressão do mamógrafo.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.