Eye Lens Dosimetry in Interventional Radiology: Assessment With Dedicated Hp(3) Dosimeters.

PURPOSE: To quantify eye lens dose in interventional radiology and assess whether neck dosimeter is a good surrogate to evaluate eye lens dosimetry. METHODS: Radiation exposure was prospectively measured in 9 interventional radiologists between May and October 2017. Standard Hp(0,07) thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were worn at the neck outside the lead apron, and 2 dedicated eye lens Hp(3) TLDs were placed just above the eyes, one midline and another at the outer edge of the left eye. Correlations between eye lens and neck TLD doses were assessed with Pearson coefficient, and linear regression was used to predict eye lens dose from neck TLD values. RESULTS: Eye lens dose without eye protection was 0.18 ± 0.11 (mean ± standard deviation; 0.08-0.41) mSv per workday and 35.3 ± 6.6 mSv (16.3-82.9) annually (200 workdays/year). Five (56%) radiologists exceeded the 20 mSv annual eye lens dose limit. Eye lens doses from left and central TLDs were 12.46 ± 3.02 and 9.29 ± 3.38 mSv, respectively (P = .027). Mean eye lens (left and central) and neck TLD doses were 10.87 ± 2.67 and 16.56 ± 5.67 mSv, respectively (P = .008). Pearson correlation coefficient between both eye lens TLD and between mean eye lens TLD and neck TLD doses were 0.91 and 0.92, respectively. Average of eye lens dose was 0.0179 + (0.5971 × neck dose). CONCLUSION: Full-time interventional radiologists are likely to suffer from deterministic radiation effects to the eye lens, especially on the left side. Neck TLD significantly overestimates eye lens dose. However, eye lens doses are highly correlated with neck doses and may be predicted from the neck TLD values.

Adrenal vein sampling: External validation of multinomial regression modelling and left adrenal vein-to-peripheral vein ratio to predict lateralization index without right adrenal vein sampling.

BACKGROUND: Adrenal vein sampling (AVS) failure is mainly due to right adrenal vein unavailability. Multinomial regression modelling (MRM) and left adrenal vein-to-peripheral vein ratio (LAV/PV) were proposed to predict the lateralization index without the right AVS. OBJECTIVE: To assess external validity of MRM and LAV/PV to predict lateralization index when right adrenal vein sampling is missing. DESIGN: Diagnostic retrospective study. PATIENTS: Development and validation cohorts included AVS of 174 and 122 patients, respectively, from 2 different centres. MEASUREMENTS: Development and validation cohort data were used, respectively, for calibration and for validation of MRM and LAV/PV to predict the lateralization index without the right adrenal vein sampling. Sensitivity and specificity of MRM and LAV/PV were compared between both centres at different pre-established specificity thresholds based on receiver operating characteristic curves generated from the development cohort data. RESULTS: At a specificity threshold of 95% set in the development cohort, specificity values exceeded 90% (range, 90.6%-98.8%) for all verified MRM and LAV/PV models in the validation cohort. Corresponding sensitivities for MRM and LAV/PV, respectively, range from 54.1% to 83.7% and 32.8% to 88.4% for the development cohort compared to 33.3%-87.5% and 2.8%-79.2% for the validation cohort. Overall, diagnostic accuracy of both methods was higher to detect right (82.8%-93.5%) than left (70.2%-80.6%) lateralization index status in both centres. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal changes in specificity from development to validation cohorts validate the use of MRM and LAV/PV to predict the lateralization index when the right AVS is missing. Both methods had better accuracy for right than left lateralization detection.