PURPOSE: The ability to estimate individual exposures to radiation following a large attack or incident has been identified as a necessity for rational and effective emergency medical response. In vivo electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy of tooth enamel has been developed to meet this need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A novel transportable EPR spectrometer, developed to facilitate tooth dosimetry in an emergency response setting, was used to measure upper incisors in a model system, in unirradiated subjects, and in patients who had received total body doses of 2 Gy. RESULTS: A linear dose response was observed in the model system. A statistically significant increase in the intensity of the radiation-induced EPR signal was observed in irradiated versus unirradiated subjects, with an estimated standard error of dose prediction of 0.9 ± 0.3 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the current ability of in vivo EPR tooth dosimetry to distinguish between subjects who have not been irradiated and those who have received exposures that place them at risk for acute radiation syndrome. Procedural and technical developments to further increase the precision of dose estimation and ensure reliable operation in the emergency setting are underway. With these developments EPR tooth dosimetry is likely to be a valuable resource for triage following potential radiation exposure of a large population.
PURPOSE: The ability to estimate individual exposures to radiation following a large attack or incident has been identified as a necessity for rational and effective emergency medical response. In vivo electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy of tooth enamel has been developed to meet this need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A novel transportable EPR spectrometer, developed to facilitate tooth dosimetry in an emergency response setting, was used to measure upper incisors in a model system, in unirradiated subjects, and in patients who had received total body doses of 2 Gy. RESULTS: A linear dose response was observed in the model system. A statistically significant increase in the intensity of the radiation-induced EPR signal was observed in irradiated versus unirradiated subjects, with an estimated standard error of dose prediction of 0.9 ± 0.3 Gy. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the current ability of in vivo EPR tooth dosimetry to distinguish between subjects who have not been irradiated and those who have received exposures that place them at risk for acute radiation syndrome. Procedural and technical developments to further increase the precision of dose estimation and ensure reliable operation in the emergency setting are underway. With these developments EPR tooth dosimetry is likely to be a valuable resource for triage following potential radiation exposure of a large population.
Authors: Harold M Swartz; Akinori Iwasaki; Tadeusz Walczak; Eugene Demidenko; Ildar Salikhov; Nadeem Khan; Piotr Lesniewski; Jerry Thomas; Alex Romanyukha; David Schauer; Piotr Starewicz Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2006-04-27 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: William F Blakely; Zhanat Carr; May Chin-May Chu; Renu Dayal-Drager; Kenzo Fujimoto; Michael Hopmeir; Ulrike Kulka; Patricia Lillis-Hearne; Gordon K Livingston; David C Lloyd; Natalie Maznyk; Maria Del Rosario Perez; Horst Romm; Yoshio Takashima; Phillipe Voisin; Ruth C Wilkins; Mitsuaki A Yoshida Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Marcy B Grace; Brian R Moyer; Joanna Prasher; Kenneth D Cliffer; Narayani Ramakrishnan; Joseph Kaminski; C Norman Coleman; Ronald G Manning; Bert W Maidment; Richard Hatchett Journal: Health Phys Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: Guy Garty; Youhua Chen; Alessio Salerno; Helen Turner; Jian Zhang; Oleksandra Lyulko; Antonella Bertucci; Yanping Xu; Hongliang Wang; Nabil Simaan; Gerhard Randers-Pehrson; Y Lawrence Yao; Sally A Amundson; David J Brenner Journal: Health Phys Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: Benjamin B Williams; Ruhong Dong; Maciej Kmiec; Greg Burke; Eugene Demidenko; David Gladstone; Roberto J Nicolalde; Artur Sucheta; Piotr Lesniewski; Harold M Swartz Journal: Health Phys Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: Ann Barry Flood; Holly K Boyle; Gaixin Du; Eugene Demidenko; Roberto J Nicolalde; Benjamin B Williams; Harold M Swartz Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2014-04-11 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: Wilson Schreiber; Sergey V Petryakov; Maciej M Kmiec; Matthew A Feldman; Paul M Meaney; Victoria A Wood; Holly K Boyle; Ann Barry Flood; Benjamin B Williams; Harold M Swartz Journal: Radiat Prot Dosimetry Date: 2016-07-15 Impact factor: 0.972
Authors: Benjamin B Williams; Ann Barry Flood; Ildar Salikhov; Kyo Kobayashi; Ruhong Dong; Kevin Rychert; Gaixin Du; Wilson Schreiber; Harold M Swartz Journal: Radiat Environ Biophys Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 1.925
Authors: Kyo Kobayashi; Ruhong Dong; Roberto Javier Nicolalde; Paul Calderon; Gaixin Du; Benjamin B Williams; Masaichi-Chang-Il Lee; Harold M Swartz; Ann Barry Flood Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Kevin M Rychert; Gang Zhu; Maciej M Kmiec; Venkata K Nemani; Benjamin B Williams; Ann Barry Flood; Harold M Swartz; Barjor Gimi Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2015-03-19