Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Evaluation of Performance and Usability of Bismuth, Tungsten Based Shields

비스무스, 텅스텐 기반 차폐체의 성능 및 유용성 평가

  • Received : 2018.11.30
  • Accepted : 2018.12.23
  • Published : 2018.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Lead apron is harmful to the human body because it is made at heavy metals, and when worn for long periods of time, it causes pain. Therefore, this paper intended to improve the defects of lead apron by using new material shields. For the comparative evaluation of lead and new material shieldes, the shielding rate and weight were measured and tested based on lead 0.5 mmPb. The rate of shielding was 97% based on lead at 0.5 mm thickness, while The new material shield T3 showed similar shielding rates as lead in 8 layers, and in T2 these values were measured in 11 layers. In addition, similar shielding rate was measured in 12 layers at B2, and 8 layers in BF, and 4 layers in $BF_2$. Comparing the weight of cases when commercialized with apron, T3, T2 and B2 were heavier than lead apron. But BF, $BF_2$ were lighter than the lead apron. Based on the results of the experiment, T3 and T2 can be used as an alternative to lead if human or environmental hazards are considered a priority. However, BF and $BF_2$ should be used if the reduction of external exposure is considered a priority.

Keywords

References

  1. Finnerty M, Brennan, PC. Protective aprons in imaging departments: manufacturer stated lead equivalence values require validation. European Radiology. 2005;15(7):1477-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2571-2
  2. Mori H, Koshida K, Ishigamori O, Matsubara K. Evaluation of the effectiveness of X-ray protective aprons in experimental and practical fields. Radiological Physics and Technology. 2014;7(1): 158-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-013-0246-x
  3. Raissaki M, Perisinakis, K, Damilakis J, Nicholas G. Eye-lens bismuth shielding in paediatric head CT: artefact evaluation and reduction. Pediatric Radiology. 2010;40(11):1748-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1715-6
  4. Servaes S, Zhu X. The effects of bismuth breast shields in conjunction with automatic tube current modulation in CT imaging. Pediatric Radiology. 2013;43(10):1287-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-013-2687-0
  5. Matsuda M, Suzuki T. Evaluation of lead aprons and their maintenance and management at our hospital. J Anesth. 2016;30(3):518-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-016-2140-2
  6. Karvatskii LM, Koval VP. Effect of molybdenum, tungsten, titanium, aluminum, and lead on the cracking of 20 steel in a medium containing hydrogen sulfide. Soviet materials science : a transl. of Fiziko-khimicheskaya mekhanika materialov / Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR. 1978;14(2):213-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00720596
  7. Butson M. An introduction to radiation protection in medicine. Australasian Physics & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2008;31(3):252. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03179352
  8. Smith JR, Marsh RM, Silosky MS. Is lead shielding of patients necessary during fluoroscopic procedures? A study based on kyphoplasty. Skeletal Radiol. 2018;47(1):37-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-017-2756-9
  9. Singh B, Chandran V, Bandhu HK, et al. Impact of lead exposure on pituitary-thyroid axis in humans. Biometals. 2000;13(2):187-92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009201426184
  10. Park HH, Lee JY, Kim JH. The Usability Evaluation According to the Application of Bismuth Shields in PET/CT Examination. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2014;37(1):49-56.