Radiation protection for an intra-operative X-ray device

Eaton, D.; Gonzalez, Regina; Duck, Stephen C.; Keshtgar, Mohammed

doi:10.1259/bjr/29466902

Cited by 34 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…64 Prospective dose surveys should be performed in every operating theatre to be used for IORT, although reference data for diagnostic kilovoltage units may be used to estimate shielding by common materials. Environmental surveys should be repeated at regular intervals to confirm the sufficiency of protection measures for clinical patients.…”

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These staff can be given personal monitors, although negligible doses were recorded in clinical practice when using a lead screen and patient surface shielding. 64 At a typical operator position of 2 m from the source, dose rates of 12-15 mSv per hour have been reported, 9 but ,5 mSv per hour should be achievable. 64 Shielding sheets placed on the patient surface over the treatment area will reduce external dose rates by 95-99% and may be useful to keep doses as low as reasonably practicable.…”

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…64 At a typical operator position of 2 m from the source, dose rates of 12-15 mSv per hour have been reported, 9 but ,5 mSv per hour should be achievable. 64 Shielding sheets placed on the patient surface over the treatment area will reduce external dose rates by 95-99% and may be useful to keep doses as low as reasonably practicable. Lead screens .0.3 mm in thickness will reduce transmitted radiation to effectively zero, however, scattered dose around the screen can still give small measured dose rates.…”

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For INTRABEAM, shields with effective lead thickness of 0.1 mm reduced the dose rate by .95%. 64,85 However, internal shields should be used with caution, as parts of the target volume may also be occluded, and they are rarely used in the UK.…”

Section: Breastmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Electronic brachytherapy—current status and future directions

Eaton¹

2015

BJR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past decade, electronic brachytherapy (EB) has emerged as an attractive modality for the treatment of skin lesions and intraoperative partial breast irradiation, as well as finding wider applications in intracavitary and interstitial sites. These miniature X-ray sources, which operate at low kilovoltage energies (,100 kV), have reduced shielding requirements and inherent portability, therefore can be used outside the traditional realms of the radiotherapy department. However, steep dose gradients and increased sensitivity to inhomogeneities challenge accurate dosimetry. Secondly, ease of use does not mitigate the need for close involvement by medical physics experts and consultant oncologists. Finally, further studies are needed to relate the more heterogeneous dose distributions to clinical outcomes. With these provisos, the practical convenience of EB strongly suggests that it will become an established option for selected patients, not only in radiotherapy departments but also in a range of operating theatres and clinics around the world.

show abstract

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Radiation Protection and Staffing Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Breastmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Electronic brachytherapy—current status and future directions

Eaton¹

2015

BJR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the treatment of breast cancer patients using radioactive rays from X-ray machines (50 kVp) during surgery, the scattered radiation dose at 1 m behind a lead shield was detected using a TLD. The results suggested that the scattered radiation dose behind the lead shield was reduced to 1% of that of the main beam [16]. Conclusively, no research has been conducted on the detection of absorbed doses by patients and the scattered radiation doses at different angles simultaneously.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scattered radiation doses absorbed by technicians at different distances from X-ray exposure: Experiments on prosthesis

Chiang

Liu

Chen

et al. 2015

BME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This work aimed to investigate the spatial distribution of scattered radiation doses induced by exposure to the portable X-ray, the C-arm machine, and to simulate the radiologist without a shield of lead clothing, radiation doses absorbed by medical staff at 2 m from the central exposure point. Material and method: With the adoption of the Rando Phantom, several frequently X-rayed body parts were exposed to X-ray radiation, and the scattered radiation doses were measured by ionization chamber dosimeters at various angles from the patient. Assuming that the central point of the X-ray was located at the belly button, five detection points were distributed in the operation room at 1 m above the ground and 1-2 m from the central point horizontally. Results: The radiation dose measured at point B was the lowest, and the scattered radiation dose absorbed by the prosthesis from the X-ray's vertical projection was 0.07 ±0.03 μGy, which was less than the background radiation levels. The Fluke biomedical model 660-5DE (400 cc) and 660-3DE (4 cc) ion chambers were used to detect air dose at a distance of approximately two meters from the central point. The AP projection radiation doses at point B was the lowest (0.07±0.03 μGy) and the radiation doses at point D was the highest (0.26±0.08 μGy) .Only taking the vertical projection into account, the radiation doses at point B was the lowest (0.52 μGy), and the radiation doses at point E was the highest (4 μGy).The PA projection radiation at point B was the lowest (0.36 μGy) and the radiation doses at point E was the highest(2.77 μGy), occupying 10-32% of the maximum doses. The maximum dose in five directions was nine times to the minimum dose. When the PX and the C-arm machine were used, the radiation doses at a distance of 2 m were attenuated to the background radiation level. The radiologist without a lead shield should stand at point B of patient's feet. Accordingly, teaching materials on radiation safety for radiological interns and clinical technicians were formulated.

show abstract

Treatment of cervical cancer with electronic brachytherapy

Lozares

Gandía-Martínez

Miranda-Burgos

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We report the first cervical cancer cases treated with interstitial electronic brachytherapy (eBT) at our hospital and compare them with plans made with high‐dose‐rate interstitial brachytherapy based on Ir192 (HDR‐BT). Materials and methods Eight patients with cervical cancer were treated with the Axxent eBT device (Xoft, Inc.). Planning was with magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography following the recommendations of the EMBRACE protocol. The dosimetry parameters of organs at risk (OAR) were evaluated for the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid colon (D2cc, D1cc, and D0.1cc). In addition, the V150 and V200 of irradiated tissue were compared for both eBT and HDR‐BT. All patients received intensity‐modulated external beam radiation therapy with a regimen of 23 sessions of 2 Gy followed by four sessions of 7 Gy of eBT performed over 2 weeks (two sessions followed by another two sessions a week later) following the EMBRACE recommendations. Each of the eight patients was followed to assess acute toxicity associated with treatment. Results The doses reaching OAR for eBT plans were lower than for HDR‐BT plans. As for acute toxicity associated with eBT, very few cases of mucositis were detected. No cases of rectal toxicity and one case with grade 1 urinary toxicity were detected. The results at 1 month are equally good, and no relapses have occurred to date. Conclusions The first results of treatment with the Axxent eBT device are promising, as no recurrences have been observed and toxicity is very low. eBT is a good alternative for treating cervical cancer in centers without access to conventional HDR.

show abstract

Radiation protection for an intra-operative X-ray device

Cited by 34 publications

References 18 publications

Electronic brachytherapy—current status and future directions

Electronic brachytherapy—current status and future directions

Scattered radiation doses absorbed by technicians at different distances from X-ray exposure: Experiments on prosthesis

Treatment of cervical cancer with electronic brachytherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About