RESUMEN
Objective:To evaluate biological dose and retrospective biodosimetry of a case of large area back skin injury caused by suspected interventional procedure.Methods:Peripheral blood from the patient was collected at about 7 months after interventional procedure, and the chromosomal aberrations in peripheral blood cells were analyzed to evaluate the retrospective biodosimetry using the correction factor of dose estimation, Dolphin′s model and Qdr method, respectively. Results:Based on the amounts of semi-automated dic and manually detected dic plus ring, the whole-body average absorbed dose of the victim was estimated to be 0.68-0.95 Gy by four different dose response curves. Over dispersion of dic or dic plus ring was also detected, and the efficiency of dose assessment was obviously increased using dic semi-automatic detection. Based on three different retrospective biodosimetry models, the estimated average absorbed dose was further corrected to be between 1.80-2.86 Gy, which was consistent with clinical diagnosis of degree Ⅳ radiation skin injury.Conclusions:A case of suspected radiation skin injury was confirmed by chromosomal aberration analysis and it’s biodosimetry was reconstructed, suggesting that the unstable chromosomal aberration analysis may be applicable to assess the retrospective biodosimetry of non-uniform local radiation exposure.
RESUMEN
Objective:To carry out investigation and analysis of an extensive skin radiation injury to the back accidentally caused by interventional procedure and to explore the problems faced in the event with emphasis on avoiding the reoccurance of similar events in the future.Methods:The data were collected by consulting the patient′s detailed medical history, collecting and analyzing clinical diagnosis and treatment data, tracking and observing their clinical manifestations and signs. The patient′s peripheral blood samples were also collected, together with the biological dose estimated and the equipment data collected on the site of the interventional treatment hospital.Results:The whole body dose to the patient was estimated to be 0.95 Gy. The typical values of kerma rate of radiation incident on the body surface due to fluoroscopic procedures were 373.5 mGy/min in subtraction modality and 47.8 mGy/min in fluoroscopy modality, respectively. The annual effective dose to the interventional radiologist was 20.51 mSv due to his operation in long-time radiation exposure conditions, higher than 3.09 mSv for other interventional radiologists with similar workload in the same department. The whole body and local clinical manifestations of the patients were in line with radiation injury. No clear diagnosis has been obtained in several hospitals, nor can obvious treatment outcomes be obsevered.Conclusion:Combined with the biological dose estimation result and clinical manifestations, the case was diagnosed as degree Ⅳ skin radiation injury. Radiation injury is closely related to whether the operation is conducted according to the standard and the output dose of X-ray machine. Non-specialized hospitals should strengthen clinical diagnosis and treatment of radiation injury.