DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

How Effective Are Radiation Reducing Gloves in C-arm Fluoroscopy-guided Pain Interventions?

  • Kim, Ah Na (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Chang, Young Jae (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Cheon, Bo Kyung (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Jae Hun (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konkuk University Medical Center)
  • Received : 2013.12.04
  • Accepted : 2014.01.17
  • Published : 2014.04.01

Abstract

Background: The physician's hands are close to the X-ray field in C-arm fluoroscopy-guided pain interventions. We prospectively investigated the radiation attenuation of Proguard RR-2 gloves. Methods: In 100 cases, the effective doses (EDs) of two dosimeters without a radiation-reducing glove were collected. EDs from the two dosimeters-one dosimeter wrapped with a glove and the other dosimeter without a glove-were also measured at the side of the table (Group 1, 140 cases) and at a location 20 cm away from the side of the table (Group 2, 120 cases). Mean differences such as age, height, weight, radiation absorbed dose (RAD), exposure time, ED, and ratio of EDs were analyzed. Results: In the EDs of two dosimeters without gloves, there were no significant differences ($39.0{\pm}36.3{\mu}Sv$ vs. $38.8{\pm}36.4{\mu}Sv$) (P = 0.578). The RAD ($192.0{\pm}182.0radcm^2$) in Group 2 was higher than that ($132.3{\pm}103.5radcm^2$) in Group 1 (P = 0.002). The ED ($33.3{\pm}30.9{\mu}Sv$) of the dosimeter without a glove in Group 1 was higher than that ($12.3{\pm}8.8{\mu}Sv$) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). The ED ($24.4{\pm}22.4{\mu}Sv$) of the dosimeter wrapped with a glove in Group 1 was higher than that ($9.2{\pm}6.8{\mu}Sv$) in Group 2 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were noted in the ratio of EDs ($73.5{\pm}6.7%$ vs. $74.2{\pm}9.3%$, P = 0.469) between Group 1 and Group 2. Conclusions: Proguard RR-2 gloves have a radiation attenuation effect of 25.8-26.5%. The radiation attenuation is not significantly different by intensity of scatter radiation or the different RADs of C-arm fluoroscopy.

Keywords

References

  1. Park PE, Park JM, Kang JE, Cho JH, Cho SJ, Kim JH, et al. Radiation safety and education in the applicants of the final test for the expert of pain medicine. Korean J Pain 2012; 25: 16-21. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2012.25.1.16
  2. Kim C, Vasaiwala S, Haque F, Pratap K, Vidovich MI. Radiation safety among cardiology fellows. Am J Cardiol 2010; 106: 125-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.02.026
  3. Jung CH, Ryu JS, Baek SW, Oh JH, Woo NS, Kim HK, et al. Radiation exposure of the hand and chest during C-arm fluoroscopy-guided procedures. Korean J Pain 2013; 26: 51-6. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2013.26.1.51
  4. Fink GE. Radiation safety in fluoroscopy for neuraxial injections. AANA J 2009; 77: 265-9.
  5. Schueler BA. Operator shielding: how and why. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 13: 167-71. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.tvir.2010.03.005
  6. Ryu JS, Baek SW, Jung CH, Cho SJ, Jung EG, Kim HK, et al. The survey about the degree of damage of radiation-protective shields in operation room. Korean J Pain 2013; 26: 142-7. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2013.26.2.142
  7. Calder PR, Tennent TD, Allen PW. Assessment of the efficacy of Proguard RR-2 radio-protective gloves during forearm manipulation. Injury 2003; 34: 159-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(01)00211-X
  8. Mori H, Koshida K, Ishigamori O, Matsubara K. Evaluation of the effectiveness of X-ray protective aprons in experimental and practical fields. Radiol Phys Technol 2014; 7: 158-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-013-0246-x
  9. Arnstein PM, Richards AM, Putney R. The risk from radiation exposure during operative X-ray screening in hand surgery. J Hand Surg Br 1994; 19: 393-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-7681(94)90097-3
  10. Koukorava C, Carinou E, Simantirakis G, Vrachliotis TG, Archontakis E, Tierris C, et al. Doses to operators during interventional radiology procedures: focus on eye lens and extremity dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2011; 144: 482-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncq328
  11. Baek SW, Ryu JS, Jung CH, Lee JH, Kwon WK, Woo NS, et al. A randomized controlled trial about the levels of radiation exposure depends on the use of collimation C-arm fluoroscopic-guided medial branch block. Korean J Pain 2013; 26: 148-53. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2013.26.2.148
  12. Hernandez Garcia JM, Vidal Marcos A, Gasco Garcia C. A survey on the use of fluoroscopy in the treatment of pain: do we perform it correctly? Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 2012; 59: 430-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redar.2012.06.005
  13. Rehani MM, Ciraj-Bjelac O, Vano E, Miller DL, Walsh S, Giordano BD, et al. ICRP Publication 117. Radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures performed outside the imaging department. Ann ICRP 2010; 40: 1-102.
  14. Albert JM. Radiation risk from CT: implications for cancer screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013; 201: W81-7. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.9226
  15. Shah DJ, Sachs RK, Wilson DJ. Radiation-induced cancer: a modern view. Br J Radiol 2012; 85: e1166-73. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/25026140
  16. Miller ME, Davis ML, MacClean CR, Davis JG, Smith BL, Humphries JR. Radiation exposure and associated risks to operating-room personnel during use of fluoroscopic guidance for selected orthopaedic surgical procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65: 1-4. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198365010-00001
  17. Back DL, Hilton AI, Briggs TW, Scott J, Burns M, Warren P. Radiation protection for your hands. Injury 2005; 36: 1416-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2004.09.024
  18. Sanchez R, Vano E, Fernandez JM, Gallego JJ. Staff radiation doses in a real-time display inside the angiography room. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2010; 33: 1210-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-010-9945-4
  19. Luchs JS, Rosioreanu A, Gregorius D, Venkataramanan N, Koehler V, Ortiz AO. Radiation safety during spine interventions. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005; 16: 107-11. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.RVI.0000142596.16611.0C
  20. Detorie N, Mahesh M, Schueler BA. Reducing occupational exposure from fluoroscopy. J Am Coll Radiol 2007; 4: 335-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2007.01.018
  21. Vano E, Kleiman NJ, Duran A, Romano-Miller M, Rehani MM. Radiation-associated lens opacities in catheterization personnel: results of a survey and direct assessments. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24: 197-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2012.10.016
  22. Miller DL, Vano E, Bartal G, Balter S, Dixon R, Padovani R, et al; Cardiovscular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe; Society of Interventional Radiology. Occupational radiation protection in interventional radiology: a joint guideline of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe and the Society of Interventional Radiology. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2010; 33: 230-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-009-9756-7
  23. Cho JH, Kim JY, Kang JE, Park PE, Kim JH, Lim JA, et al. A study to compare the radiation absorbed dose of the C-arm fluoroscopic modes. Korean J Pain 2011; 24: 199-204. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2011.24.4.199

Cited by

  1. Radiation Safety for Pain Physicians: Technique or Equipment vol.27, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2014.27.2.101
  2. Clinical evaluation of a radio-protective cream for the hands of the pediatric interventional cardiologist vol.89, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.26845
  3. The radiation safety education and the pain physicians' efforts to reduce radiation exposure vol.30, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2017.30.2.104
  4. Three principles for radiation safety: time, distance, and shielding vol.31, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2018.31.3.145
  5. Radiation exposure and protection for eyes in pain management vol.12, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.2017.12.4.297
  6. Protecting Surgeons' Fingers from Radiation Exposure during Lumbosacral Selective Nerve Root Block vol.3, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2018-0056
  7. Radiation shielding properties of bismuth borate glasses doped with different concentrations of cadmium oxides vol.46, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.02.039
  8. Enhanced X-ray shielding properties of NRL gloves with nano-Bi2O3 and their mechanical properties under aging conditions vol.186, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2021.109530