|
|
||||||||
Technical Innovation |
1 All authors: Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, DUMC Box 3808, Durham, NC 27705.
Received August 27, 2006;
accepted after revision November 21, 2006.
S. Mukundan is a 20052006 American Roentgen Ray Society Scholar.
Abstract
|
|
|---|
CONCLUSION. Bismuth shielding reduced radiation dose to the eye by up to 42%; shield artifact fell outside the diagnostic area of interest.
Keywords: bismuth shielding CT dosimetry eye head and neck imaging pediatric imaging radiation dose safety
|
|
|---|
The eye is one of the most radiosensitive tissues, and the threshold for inducing cataracts in adults has been documented as low as 0.52 Gy (50200 rad) [2]. In children this threshold is even lower, with the development of cataracts having been documented at less than half this dose of radiation [2]. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to shield the pediatric orbit from any unnecessary radiation during CT. Typically, the dose to the eye is about 50 mGy (5 rad), depending on the instrument and protocol [1]. Moreover, the as-low-as-reasonably-achievable (ALARA) principle would dictate that the radiation dose be limited.
Our objective for this study was to assess a contemporary method for measuring radiation dose to the pediatric lens and orbit and to apply this method to determine whether the novel use of a bismuth-impregnated latex eye shield could offer protection from radiation without a loss in di agnostic quality.
|
|
|---|
The 5-year-old pediatric anthropomorphic phantoms (705-D, CIRS) used in this study were constructed of human-tissue-equivalent materials to represent the configuration and size of a typical 5-year-old child. Before exposure in the CT scanner, 20 MOSFET dosimeters were deployed throughout the phantom eye lens well, retinal well (eye globe), brain, chest, and thyroid (Fig. 1). The eye shield was fabricated from a double layer of bismuth-impregnated latex (1.7 g Bi/cm2, equivalent to 0.45 mg/cm3 of lead) that was placed on top of a 1.0-cm-thick radiolucent foam step-off pad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|
The axial head protocol at 140 kVp revealed a radiation dose reduction from 4.6 (unshielded) to 2.8 cGy (shielded) for the orbit and a radiation dose reduction from 2.9 (unshielded) to 2.1 cGy (shielded) for the lens. Therefore, the dose reduction at 140 kVp was 39% for the orbit and 28% for the lens.
|
|
|---|
Exclusion of the orbits as a means of reducing the dose, however, is impractical. Yeoman et al. [8] reported that only 32% of radiology centers surveyed routinely avoided the orbits in head CT examinations. Even if all centers used a policy to configure pediatric CT along the supraorbital meatal baseline, axial scanning would still be necessary to evaluate a child for craniosynostosis or any orbital, sinus, or mastoid problems. Therefore, excluding the orbit would not be possible, and bismuth shielding would be helpful to reduce the dose from radiation exposure.
Concern about artifact has limited the usage of bismuth shielding; however, in most instances, this artifact is minimal [47]. Using a step-off pad, the artifact from the bismuth shields was not evident on the initial scan and only became visible after artificially widening the window settings of the image. The step-off pads below the bismuth shields moved the artifact to a more ventral location outside the area of diagnostic interest (Fig. 3A, 3B).
Because all new CT scanners use automatic tube current modulation as a tool to decrease radiation dose, it is important to evaluate the effect bismuth shielding might have on automatic current modulation. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no systematic evaluation of bismuth shields for in-plane shielding using automatic tube current modulation in patients. The method of tube current modulation varies depending on the manufacturer [9]. For example, one form of tube current modulation modulates the tube current based on regional changes in density assessed on the topogram (scout image). In this setting, placement of a shield could arguably offset both the dose reduction through the shield and the benefits of tube current modulation because the increased density through the shielded region seen on the topogram would result in an increase in tube current. Preliminary investigation of this phenomenon has shown that placement of the shield after the topogram has been obtained reduces this effect (Frush DP, unpublished data).
In summary, we found that the use of a bismuth shield with a step-off pad significantly reduces the radiation dose to the eye by 42%. This dose reduction can be reliably detected by a MOSFET dosimeter in an MDCT scanner, which is important because the rapid development of scanner technology has resulted in the lack of development and validation of mathematic models for dose estimation for all scanner types. Given the sensitivity of the pediatric eye to radiation exposure, bismuth shields should be used in pediatric patients when the orbits are included in the CT examination.
Acknowledgments
We thank Carolyn Lowry for technical support. In addition, this study was
performed as part of a senior-year engineering project by Jesse Riley and Jena
Jamal, students in the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University. Giao
Nguyen and Greta Toncheva of the radiation safety office played key roles in
the data acquisition.
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. A. Jaffe, T. T. Yoshizumi, G. Toncheva, C. Anderson-Evans, C. Lowry, C. M. Miller, R. C. Nelson, and C. E. Ravin Radiation Dose for Body CT Protocols: Variability of Scanners at One Institution Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2009; 193(4): 1141 - 1147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Kim, T. T. Yoshizumi, D. P. Frush, C. Anderson-Evans, and G. Toncheva DOSIMETRIC CHARACTERISATION OF BISMUTH SHIELDS IN CT: MEASUREMENTS AND MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS Radiat Prot Dosimetry, March 5, 2009; (2009) ncp025v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. A. Mettler Jr, W. Huda, T. T. Yoshizumi, and M. Mahesh Effective Doses in Radiology and Diagnostic Nuclear Medicine: A Catalog Radiology, July 1, 2008; 248(1): 254 - 263. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |