Prostatic artery embolization: radiation exposure to patients and staff. (30th March 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Garzón, W J; Andrade, G; Dubourcq, F; Abud, D G; Bredow, M; Khoury, H J; Kramer, R
• Is Part Of: Journal of radiological protection. Volume 36:Number 2(2016:Jun.)
• Page Start: 246
• Page End: 254
• Publication Date: 2016-03-30
• Subjects: prostatic artery embolization -- peak skin dose -- personal dose equivalent -- Effective dose; Radiation -- Safety measures -- Periodicals; Health Physics -- Periodicals; Radiation Monitoring -- Periodicals; Radiation Protection -- Periodicals; Rayonnement -- Sécurité -- Mesures -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Fulltext; Internet Resource; Periodical; 363.179905
• DOI: 10.1088/0952-4746/36/2/246
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0952-4746

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiation doses to patients and staff received from the first cases of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) conducted in a public hospital in Recife, Brazil. Five PAE procedures for 5 men diagnosed with benign prostatic hyperplasia were investigated. In order to characterize patient exposure, dosimetric quantities, such as the air kerma-area product ( P KA ), the cumulative air kerma at the interventional reference point ( Ka, r ), the number of images, etc, were registered. To evaluate the possibility for deterministic effects, the peak skin dose (PSD) was measured using radiochromic films. For evaluation of personal dose equivalent and effective dose to the medical staff, thermoluminescent dosemeters (TLD-100) were used. The effective dose was estimated using the double dosimetry alghoritm of von Boetticher. The results showed that the mean patient's PSD per procedure was 2674.2 mGy. With regard to the medical staff, the mean, minimum and maximum effective doses estimated per procedure were: 18 μ Sv, 12 μ Sv and 21 μ Sv respectively. High personal equivalent doses were found for the feet, hands and lens of the eye, due to the use of multiple left anterior oblique projections and the improper use of the suspended lead screen and the lead curtain during procedures.