Li Mao1, Tianyu Liu1, Peter F Caracappa1,2, Hui Lin1,3, Yiming Gao4, Lawrence T Dauer4, X George Xu1. 1. Nuclear Engineering Program, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180, USA. 2. Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10032, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. 4. Radiology & Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify the effects of operator head posture and different types of protective eyewear on the eye lens dose to operators in interventional radiology (IR). METHODS: A deformable computational human phantom, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) Adult Male, consisting of a high-resolution eye model, was used to simulate a radiologist who is performing an interventional radiology procedure. The radiologist phantom was deformed to a set of different head postures. Three different protective eyewear models were incorporated into the posture-deformed radiologist phantom. The eye lens dose of the radiologist was calculated using the Monte Carlo code, MCNP. Effects of the radiologist's head posture and different types of protective eyewear on eye lens doses were studied. The relationship between efficacy of protective eyewear and the radiologist's head posture was investigated. Effects of other parameters on efficacy of protective eyewear were also studied, including the angular position of the radiologist, the gap between the eyewear and the face of the radiologist, and the lead equivalent thickness. RESULTS: The dose to both lenses decreased by 80% as the head posture moved from looking downward to looking upward. Sports wrap glasses were found to reduce doses further than the other two studied models. The efficacy of eyewear was found to be related to radiologist's head posture as well. When the radiologist was looking up, the protective eyewear almost provided no protection to both lenses. Other factors such as the face-to-eyewear distance and the lead equivalent thickness were also found to have an impact on the efficacy of protective eyewear. The dose reduction factor (DRF), defined as the ratio of the dose to the lens without protection to that with protection, decreased from 4.25 to 1.07 as the face-to-eyewear distance increased. The DRF almost doubled when the lead equivalent thickness increased from 0.07 to 0.35 mm. However, further increase in lead equivalent thickness showed little improvement in dose reduction. CONCLUSION: The radiologist's head posture has a significant influence on the eye lens dose in IR. Sports wrap protective eyewear which conforms to the curve of the face is essential for the radiation protection of the eye lens. However, the radiologist's head posture and other exposure parameters should be considered when evaluating the protection of the radiologist's eyes.
PURPOSE: To quantify the effects of operator head posture and different types of protective eyewear on the eye lens dose to operators in interventional radiology (IR). METHODS: A deformable computational human phantom, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) Adult Male, consisting of a high-resolution eye model, was used to simulate a radiologist who is performing an interventional radiology procedure. The radiologist phantom was deformed to a set of different head postures. Three different protective eyewear models were incorporated into the posture-deformed radiologist phantom. The eye lens dose of the radiologist was calculated using the Monte Carlo code, MCNP. Effects of the radiologist's head posture and different types of protective eyewear on eye lens doses were studied. The relationship between efficacy of protective eyewear and the radiologist's head posture was investigated. Effects of other parameters on efficacy of protective eyewear were also studied, including the angular position of the radiologist, the gap between the eyewear and the face of the radiologist, and the lead equivalent thickness. RESULTS: The dose to both lenses decreased by 80% as the head posture moved from looking downward to looking upward. Sports wrap glasses were found to reduce doses further than the other two studied models. The efficacy of eyewear was found to be related to radiologist's head posture as well. When the radiologist was looking up, the protective eyewear almost provided no protection to both lenses. Other factors such as the face-to-eyewear distance and the lead equivalent thickness were also found to have an impact on the efficacy of protective eyewear. The dose reduction factor (DRF), defined as the ratio of the dose to the lens without protection to that with protection, decreased from 4.25 to 1.07 as the face-to-eyewear distance increased. The DRF almost doubled when the lead equivalent thickness increased from 0.07 to 0.35 mm. However, further increase in lead equivalent thickness showed little improvement in dose reduction. CONCLUSION: The radiologist's head posture has a significant influence on the eye lens dose in IR. Sports wrap protective eyewear which conforms to the curve of the face is essential for the radiation protection of the eye lens. However, the radiologist's head posture and other exposure parameters should be considered when evaluating the protection of the radiologist's eyes.
Authors: Alexander Gangl; Hannes Alexander Deutschmann; Rupert Horst Portugaller; Georg Stücklschweiger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-09-08 Impact factor: 5.315