Abstract
Objective
To assess the radiation dose received by the radiologist when performing wire localisation for axillary radio-isotope sentinel node imaging-guided biopsy in patients with impalpable breast cancers treated with breast-preserving excision. When wire placement follows radio-isotope sentinel node imaging (RSNI) the radiologist is exposed to a radiation risk that has never been previously assessed.
Methods
Radiation doses to radiologists performing ultrasound-guided localisation following nuclear medicine sentinel node imaging were measured for procedures on the day of surgery (20 MBq) and also on the day before surgery (40 MBq). These measurements were compared with theoretically calculated doses.
Results
Twelve patients showed comparable results between measurements and estimated doses. The mean measured dose was 1.8 μSv (estimated 1.8 μSv) for same-day and 4.8 μSv (estimated 3.4 μSv) for next-day surgery cases. At worst, radiologists who perform 36 wire localisations per year immediately following RSNI receive a radiation dose of 0.17 mSv.
Conclusions
This study highlights the need to inform radiologists of the relative risk when performing pre-surgical localisation after RSNI. This risk should be justified locally in accordance with the total dose received by the localising radiologist. Particular consideration should be given to pregnant staff and the possibility of performing wire localisations before radio-isotope injection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm K, Foshag LJ, Cochran AJ (1992) Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 127:392–399
Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbank JT (1993) Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol 2:335–340
Wallis M, Tardivon A, Helbich T, Schreer I (2007) Guidelines from the European society of breast imaging for diagnostic interventional breast procedures, European society of breast imaging. Eur Radiol 17(2):581–588
Waddington WA, Keshtgar MRS, Taylor I, Lakhani SR, Short MD, Ell PJ (2000) Radiation safety of the sentinel lymph node technique in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 27:377–391
Nejc D, Wrzesień M, Piekarski J, Olszewski J, Pluta P, Kuśmierek J, Jeziorski A (2006) Sentinel node biopsy in patients with breast cancer–evaluation of exposure to radiation of medical staff. Eur J Surg Oncol 32(2):133–138
Klausen TL, Chakera AH, Friis E, Rank F, Hesse B, Holm S (2005) Radiation doses to staff involved in sentinel node operations for breast cancer. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 25:196–202
McMasters KM, Wong SL, Martin RC (2001) Dermal injection of radioactive colloid is superior to peritumoral injection for breast cancer sentinel lymph node biopsy: results of a multiinstitutional study. Ann Surg 233:676–687
The Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine (1991) Radiation Protection in Nuclear Medicine and Pathology. IPSM Report 63
National Radiological Protection Board (1992) Protection of the patient in X-ray computed tomography. HMSO, London
International Commission on Radiological Protection (2007) The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Annals of the ICRP, Publication 103
National Radiological Protection Board (2002) Radiation exposure of the UK population from medical and dental X-ray examinations. NRPB-W4
Manoy S, Fieldus J, Graham J, Morton R, Hall JRW (2008) Effect of injection technique and wire localization on negative node rates in sentinel lymph node imaging. Nucl Med Com 29(5):495
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Meades, R.T., Svensson, W.E., Frank, J.W. et al. Carcinoma of the breast wire localisation post nuclear medicine sentinel lymph node imaging. Are radiologists receiving a significant dose?. Eur Radiol 20, 529–532 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1594-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1594-0