Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Interventional cardiologists face significant radiation exposure during interventional cardiology procedures. Therefore, this study focuses on assessing radiation exposure among interventional cardiologists during their procedures. Specifically, it aims to determine the effectiveness of both single and double dosimeter methods in estimating annual occupational radiation doses. This research holds pioneering significance as it represents the very first study undertaken in Sri Lanka. Thirteen interventional cardiologists performed 486 interventional cardiology procedures over three months in three different healthcare institutes. Active Hp(10) dosimeters were placed to measure radiation exposure. Effective doses were calculated using single and double dosimetric algorithms. Annual occupational doses were assessed on an operator basis. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess algorithmic differences and dose variations using the Kruskal–Wallis test and linear regression. The highest annual occupational dose for each dosimetric algorithm received as 2.00 ± 0.24 mSv, 2.29 ± 0.48 mSv, 3.35 ± 0.71 mSv, and 2.64 ± 0.42 mSv, respectively, and remained below the recommended safety limit of 20 mSv/year. The Kruskal–Wallis test revealed no significant differences in the effective doses among double dosimetric algorithms, as well as between single and double dosimetric algorithms (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed strong correlations among various algorithms, demonstrating consistency. The findings of this study hold significant effects on interventional cardiology practice in Sri Lanka, enhancing radiation safety and monitoring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. http://www.statistics.gov.lk/. The Department of Census and Statistics, Sri Lanka. 2023. 2023. Accessed 4 Oct 2023.

  2. Sri Lanka College of Cardiology [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://slcc.lk/, URL: https://slcc.lk/. Accessed 4 Oct 2023.

  3. Moladoust H, Ghazanfari-Tehran M, Nikseresht V, Nadim T, Rad MA. Comparison of five developed algorithms to estimate staff effective dose in interventional cardiology: Are they interchangeable? J Med Imaging Heal Informatics. 2015;5:647–51. https://doi.org/10.1166/jmihi.2015.1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Biso SMR, Vidovich MI. Radiation protection in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. J Thorac Dis. 2020;12:1648–55. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2019.12.86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Sowby FD. Annals of the ICRP. Ann ICRP. 1981;6:1. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6453(81)90127-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. López PO, Dauer LT, Loose R, Martin CJ, Miller DL, Vañó E, Doruff M, Padovani R, Massera G, Yoder C. ICRP Publication 139: Occupational Radiological Protection in Interventional Procedures. Ann ICRP. 2018;47:1–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146645317750356.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Martin CJ. Personnel dosimetry in UK radiology: Is it time for a change? J Radiol Prot. 2012;32:2–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/32/1/E03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kuipers G, Velders XL, De Winter RJ, Reekers JA, Piek JJ. Evaluation of the occupational doses of interventional radiologists. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008;31:483–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-008-9307-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Järvinen H, Buls N, Clerinx P, Miljanić S, Nikodemová D, Ranogajec-komor M, Struelens L, d’Errico F. Comparison of double dosimetry algorithms for estimating the effective dose in occupational dosimetry of interventional radiology staff. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;131:80–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncn239.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martin CJ. Personal dosimetry for interventional operators: when and how should monitoring be done? Br J Radiol. 2011;84:639–48. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/24828606.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuipers G, Velders XL. Effective dose to staff from interventional procedures: estimations from single and double dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2009;136:95–100. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncp155.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schultz FW, Zoetelief J. Estimating effective dose for a cardiac catheterisation procedure with single or double personal dosemeters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;118:196–204. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncl018.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Padovani R, Foti C, Malisan MR. Staff dosimetry protocols in interventional radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2001;94:193–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a006471.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Niklason LT, Victoria Marx M, Chan HP. The estimation of occupational effective dose in diagnostic radiology with two dosimeters. Health Phys. 1994;67:611–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004032-199412000-00003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. The Swiss Federal Department of the Interior and the Federal Department of the Environment, Transport E and C. Swiss Ordinance for personal dosimetry (Dosimetry Regulation). 1994, Swiss Ordinance for personal dosimetry, edited by the Federal Chancellery, Bern 1999.

  16. Baechler S, Gardon M, Bochud F, Sans-Merce M, Trueb Ph, Verdun FR. Personnel dosimetry in fluoroscopy. Paris: Proc. of Second European IRPA Congress, (Société Françarse de Radioprotection) P-091, 1–10, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Von Boetticher H, Lachmund J, Hoffmann W. An analytic approach to double dosimetry algorithms in occupational dosimetry using energy dependent organ dose conversion coefficients. Health Phys. 2010;99:800–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e3181e850da.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim KP, Miller DL, Balter S, Kleinerman RA, Linet MS, Kwon D, Simon SL. Occupational radiation doses to operators performing cardiac catheterization procedures. Health Phys. 2008;103:80–99. https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e31824dae76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Fardid R, Mirzadeh F, Rezaei H. Occupational doses of cardiologists in cath labs and simulation method. J Cancer Res Ther. 2017;13:901–7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1482.192767.Cited:in: (PMID: 29237950).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Paulsen GU. Assessment of effective dose and dose to the lens. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;132:313–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Aalbers T, Duane S, Kapsch R-P, Meghzifene A. Measurement uncertainty—a practical guide for secondary standards dosimetry laboratories. 2008. URL: https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1585_web.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2023.

  22. Trianni A, Padovani R, Foti C, Cragnolini E, Chizzola G, Toh H, Bernardi G, Proclemer A. Dose to cardiologists in haemodynamic and electrophysiology cardiac interventional procedures. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;117:111–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/nci764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ingwersen M, Drabik A, Kulka U, Oestreicher U, Fricke S, Krankenberg H, Schwencke C, Mathey D. Physicians’ radiation exposure in the catheterization lab: Does the type of procedure matter? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:1095–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2013.05.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kaljevic J, Ciraj-Bjelac O, Stankovic J, Arandjic D, Bozovic P, Antic V. Occupational dose assessment in interventional cardiology in Serbia. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016;170:279–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncv439.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bahruddin NA, Hashim S, Karim MKA, Sabarudin A, Ang WC, Salehhon N, Bakar KA. Radiation dose to physicians’ eye lens during interventional radiology. J Phys Conf Ser. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/694/1/012035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Alemayehu TG, Bogale GG, Bazie GW. Occupational radiation exposure dose and associated factors among radiology personnel in Eastern Amhara, Ethiopia. PLoS One [Internet]. 2023;18:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286400.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim J, Seo S, Lee DN, Park S, Im KJ, Park S, Jin YW. Occupational exposure characteristics and factors associated with radiation doses among Korean Radiation Workers. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2020;189:106–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncaa019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dalah EZ, Mahdi O, Elshami W, Abuzaid MM, David LR, Mira OA, Obaideen A, Elmahdi HM, Bradley DA. Occupational doses to cardiologists performing fluoroscopically-guided procedures. Radiat Phys Chem [Internet]. 2018;153:21–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.09.008.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Najafi M, Nedaie HA, Lahooti A, Omranipour R, Nafissi N, Akbari ME, Olfatbakhsh A, Kaviani A, Alavi N. Radiation exposure of the surgeons in sentinel lymph node biopsy. Iran J Radiat Res. 2012;10:53–7.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Sri Lanka [KDU/RG/2021/FAHS/003]. We declare no conflicts of interest. Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe was involved in the conceptualization, data extraction, data analysis, and drafting of the manuscript. Vijitha Ramanathan and Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah were involved in conceptualization, checking the accuracy of data extraction and analysis, reviewing, and supervision.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiography and Radiotherapy, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Ratmalana, Sri Lanka

    Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe & Vijitha Ramanathan

  2. Department of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Institute, Melbourne, Australia

    Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah

  3. School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

    Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah

Authors
  1. Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vijitha Ramanathan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sivananthan Sarasanandarajah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sachini Udara Wickramasinghe.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All the authors have declared no conflict of interest. The study obtained institutional ethical clearance and informed consent from all the participants.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wickramasinghe, S.U., Ramanathan, V. & Sarasanandarajah, S. Assessment of dosimetric approaches in evaluating radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists in Sri Lanka. Radiol Phys Technol 17, 258–268 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00774-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-023-00774-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation