Literature DB >> 11487832

Stray radiation in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory.

S Balter1.   

Abstract

Staff radiation risk is related to the radiation field in which individuals work. Traditional protective measures focus on reducing stochastic risk. However, deterministic injury to the operator's hands cannot always be ignored. The stray radiation field is almost totally attributable to scatter from the patient. Its relative intensity is greatest near the entry port of the useful beam into the patient. The entry port moves during the procedure as the operator selects various required projections. Therefore, the relative exposure rate at any particular location in the laboratory changes with the clinical projection. The absolute scatter intensity is also dependent on the size and strength of the useful beam. Operators may put their hands near or in the useful beam. Leaded surgical gloves provide some overall finger protection for scatter fields. However, because of automatic dose rate controls, these gloves often increase risk when the operator's hands are seen on the image monitor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11487832     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a006468

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry        ISSN: 0144-8420            Impact factor:   0.972


  7 in total

1.  Radiation organ doses received in a nationwide cohort of U.S. radiologic technologists: methods and findings.

Authors:  Steven L Simon; Dale L Preston; Martha S Linet; Jeremy S Miller; Alice J Sigurdson; Bruce H Alexander; Deukwoo Kwon; R Craig Yoder; Parveen Bhatti; Mark P Little; Preetha Rajaraman; Dunstana Melo; Vladimir Drozdovitch; Robert M Weinstock; Michele M Doody
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 2.841

Review 2.  Minimising radiation exposure to physicians performing fluoroscopically guided cardiac catheterisation procedures: a review.

Authors:  Kwang Pyo Kim; Donald L Miller
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2009-03-27       Impact factor: 0.972

3.  A more accurate and safer method for the measurement of scattered radiation in X-ray examination rooms.

Authors:  Tokiko Nakamura; Suzuki Shoichi; Yasutaka Takei; Masanao Kobayashi; Vergil Cruz; Ikuo Kobayashi; Satoshi Asegawa; Kyoichi Kato
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2019-12-23

4.  Organ-specific external dose coefficients and protective apron transmission factors for historical dose reconstruction for medical personnel.

Authors:  Steven L Simon
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.922

5.  X-Ray Exposure in Cardiac Electrophysiology: A Retrospective Analysis in 8150 Patients Over 7 Years of Activity in a Modern, Large-Volume Laboratory.

Authors:  Michela Casella; Antonio Dello Russo; Eleonora Russo; Valentina Catto; Francesca Pizzamiglio; Martina Zucchetti; Benedetta Majocchi; Stefania Riva; Giulia Vettor; Maria Antonietta Dessanai; Gaetano Fassini; Massimo Moltrasio; Fabrizio Tundo; Carlo Vignati; Sergio Conti; Alice Bonomi; Corrado Carbucicchio; Luigi Di Biase; Andrea Natale; Claudio Tondo
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 6.  Treatment Options in AF Patients with Cancer; Focus on Catheter Ablation.

Authors:  Silvia Garibaldi; Michela Chianca; Iacopo Fabiani; Michele Emdin; Marcello Piacenti; Claudio Passino; Alberto Aimo; Antonella Fedele; Carlo Maria Cipolla; Daniela Maria Cardinale
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-30       Impact factor: 4.964

7.  Cardiac catheterization real-time dynamic radiation dose measurement to estimate lifetime attributable risk of cancer.

Authors:  Chun-Yuan Tu; Chung-Jung Lin; Bang-Hung Yang; Jay Wu; Tung-Hsin Wu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.