ABSTRACT
Objective To study the variation in net count rates of natural radionuclides in background of gamma-ray spectrometer,so as to provide a scientific basis for reducing the effect of background fluctuations on sample measurement.Methods The unscheduled background spectrum obtained using two high-purity gamma-ray spectrometers during 2013-2017 were collected,and then the net count rates of 210pb,234Th,212Pb,214pb,208Tl,214Bi,228Ac and 40K were calculated and analyzed by aid of statistical method.Results There was a significant difference in the net count rates of 210Pb,234Th,212Pb,214Pb,208Tl,214Bi,228Ac and 40K in the background spectrum of gamma-ray spectrometer,and the net count rates of 214Pb,214Bi and 40K was significantly higher than those of 210Pb,234Th,212pb,208Tl and 228Ac.There were no significant differences in the net count rates of these eight natural radionuclides from 2013 to 2017,respectively (P ＞ O.05).However,the coefficients of variation in the net count rates for 214pb and 214Bi were both greater than 50％.Conclusions When the activity concentration of natural radionuclides is determined in a sample by gamma-ray spectrometer,it is critical to subtract the background spectrum obtained recently to ensure the accuracy of the measurement,especially for the low activity concentration of natural radionuclide to be measured.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the radiation dose from body γ-knife treatment to the nontargeted region's sensitive organs before and after shielding.Methods 20 patients suffering tumors less than 5 cm were selected.Calibrated thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLD) were placed above the sensitive organs,such as lens,thyroid gland and sexual gland,to measure the radiation dose received before shielding.Different plans were prepared for the patients with lung and renicapsule tumors using calibrators of different size.Radiation dose was measured by the aid of water phantom.For selected lungtumor treatment plan,the radiation doses were measured at the same location on the water phantom shielded with and without 1,2 and 4 cm lead,respectively.Results The maximum doses were 1 023.3 mGy for lens,1 235.7 mGy for thyroid gland and 1 176.8 mGy for sexual glands after treatment,respectively,being higher on the left site than the right.The radiation doses to the sensitive organs were higher for the water phatom with more tartgted points,decreasing by 55％-91％ after being covered with 1,2 and 4 cm lead shieldings.There were significant differences in doses received before and after lead shielding (t =14.4,12.9,13.3,P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions In the course of body γ-knife treatment,the additional factors would increase the dose to the sensitive organs.Therefore,it is necessary to provide lead shielding protection to the teenagers and adults with fertility when they undergo body γ-knife treatment.Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry,ChiCTR-OOC-16008259.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the efficacy between californium?252 ( 252 Cf ) neutron intraluminal brachytherapy combined with external?beam radiotherapy with lead?shielding pelvic parallel opposing field technique and non?lead?shielding four?field box technique for cervical cancer. Methods A total of 52 patients with stage Ⅱa?Ⅲb cervical squamous cell carcinoma who were admitted to our hospital from 2004 to 2007 were enrolled as subjects and paired by clinical stage, age, tumor size, and degree of anemia. The 26 pairs of patients were divided into lead?shielding pelvic parallel opposing field group (lead?shielding group) and non?lead?shielding four?field box group (non?lead?shielding group). For all patients in both groups, 252 Cf neutron brachytherapy was added in external?beam radiotherapy. The local control (LC), overall survival (OS), and disease?free survival (DFS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan?Meier method and analyzed using the log?rank test. The difference in the incidence of late complications was analyzed using the McNemar method. Results There were significant differences in 5?year LC, OS, and DFS rates between the lead?shielding group and the non?lead?shielding group (85% vs. 81%, P= 0?? 014;89% vs. 73%, P=0?? 013; 89% vs. 73%, P= 0?? 013 ). There was also significant difference in the incidence of late complications between the lead?shielding group and the non?lead?shielding group ( 12% vs. 23%, P=0?? 008). Conclusions When intraluminal brachytherapy combined with external?beam radiotherapy is used to treat cervical cancer, the centers of the front and back fields should be shielded by lead, regardless of whether the parallel opposing field technique or the four?field box technique is used.