Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, part 5: local radiation injury.

This final article in the series on the medical management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses focuses on the effects of acute ionizing radiation exposure to one of the largest organ systems of the body-the skin. These injuries may extend beyond the skin into deeper tissues and cause local radiation injury. There are numerous causes of these injuries, ranging from industrial incidents to medical procedures. In the present article, the authors characterize the clinical course, pathophysiologic process, sources of injury, diagnosis, and management of local radiation injury and describe a clinical scenario. This information is important for primary care physicians, to whom patients are likely to initially present with such injuries.

Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, part 4: acute radiation syndrome.

To provide proper medical care for patients after a radiation incident, it is necessary to make the correct diagnosis in a timely manner and to ascertain the relative magnitude of the incident. The present article addresses the clinical diagnosis and management of high-dose radiation injuries and illnesses in the first 24 to 72 hours after a radiologic or nuclear incident. To evaluate the magnitude of a high-dose incident, it is important for the health physicist, physician, and radiobiologist to work together and to assess many variables, including medical history and physical examination results; the timing of prodromal signs and symptoms (eg, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, transient incapacitation, hypotension, and other signs and symptoms suggestive of high-level exposure); and the incident history, including system geometry, source-patient distance, and the suspected radiation dose distribution.

Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, Part 3: Radiobiology and health effects of ionizing radiation.

Ionizing radiation exposure can induce profound changes in intracellular components, potentially leading to diverse health effects in exposed individuals. Any cellular component can be damaged by radiation, but some components affect cellular viability more profoundly than others. The ionization caused by radiation lasts longer than the initial inciting incident, continuing as 1 ionization incident causes another. In some cases, damage to DNA can lead to cellular death at mitosis. In other cases, activation of the genetic machinery can lead to a genetic cascade potentially leading to mutations or cell death by apoptosis. In the third of 5 articles on the management of injuries and illnesses caused by ionizing radiation, the authors provide a clinically relevant overview of the pathophysiologic process associated with potential exposure to ionizing radiation.

Electron paramagnetic resonance radiation dose assessment in fingernails of the victim exposed to high dose as result of an accident.

In this paper, we report results of radiation dose measurements in fingernails of a worker who sustained a radiation injury to his right thumb while using 130 kVp X-ray for nondestructive testing. Clinically estimated absorbed dose was about 20-25 Gy. Electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) dose assessment was independently carried out by two laboratories, the Naval Dosimetry Center (NDC) and French Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN). The laboratories used different equipments and protocols to estimate doses in the same fingernail samples. NDC used an X-band transportable EPR spectrometer, e-scan produced by Bruker BioSpin, and a universal dose calibration curve. In contrast, IRSN used a more sensitive Q-band stationary spectrometer (EMXplus) with a new approach for the dose assessment (dose saturation method), derived by additional dose irradiation to known doses. The protocol used by NDC is significantly faster than that used by IRSN, nondestructive, and could be done in field conditions, but it is probably less accurate and requires more sample for the measurements. The IRSN protocol, on the other hand, potentially is more accurate and requires very small amount of sample but requires more time and labor. In both EPR laboratories, the intense radiation-induced signal was measured in the accidentally irradiated fingernails and the resulting dose assessments were different. The dose on the fingernails from the right thumb was estimated as 14 ± 3 Gy at NDC and as 19 ± 6 Gy at IRSN. Both EPR dose assessments are given in terms of tissue kerma. This paper discusses the experience gained by using EPR for dose assessment in fingernails with a stationary spectrometer versus a portable one, the reasons for the observed discrepancies in dose, and potential advantages and disadvantages of each approach for EPR measurements in fingernails.

Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, part 2: nontherapeutic radiologic/nuclear incidents.

In the second of 5 articles on the management of injuries and illnesses caused by ionizing radiation, the authors discuss nontherapeutic radiologic/nuclear incidents: use of a radiologic exposure device, use of a radiologic dispersal device, nuclear power plant safety failure, and detonation of an improvised nuclear device. The present article focuses on how such incidents--whether involving deliberate or accidental methods of radiation exposure--produce casualties and how physicians need to understand the pathologic process of injuries caused by these incidents. To identify the diagnoses associated with nontherapeutic exposure in time to improve morbidity and mortality, physicians must maintain a high index of suspicion when faced with a specific constellation of symptoms. In some scenarios, the sheer number of uninjured, unaffected persons who might present to health care institutions or professionals may be overwhelming. Public health and safety issues may seriously disrupt the ability to respond to and recover from a radiologic and nuclear incident, especially a nuclear detonation.

Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, part 1: physics, radiation protection, and radiation instrumentation.

Ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses are exceedingly rare; therefore, most physicians have never managed such conditions. When confronted with a possible radiation injury or illness, most physicians must seek specialty consultation. Protection of responders, health care workers, and patients is an absolute priority for the delivery of medical care. Management of ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses, as well as radiation protection, requires a basic understanding of physics. Also, to provide a greater measure of safety when working with radioactive materials, instrumentation for detection and identification of radiation is needed. Because any health care professional could face a radiation emergency, it is imperative that all institutions have emergency response plans in place before an incident occurs. The present article is an introduction to basic physics, ionizing radiation, radiation protection, and radiation instrumentation, and it provides a basis for management of the consequences of a radiologic or nuclear incident.

Role of dicentric analysis in an overarching biodosimetry strategy for use following a nuclear detonation in an urban environment.

In the moments immediately following a nuclear detonation, casualties with a variety of injuries including trauma, burns, radiation exposure, and combined injuries would require immediate assistance. Accurate and timely radiation dose assessments, based on patient history and laboratory testing, are absolutely critical to support adequately the triage and treatment of those affected. This capability is also essential for ensuring the proper allocation of scarce resources and will support longitudinal evaluation of radiation-exposed individuals and populations. To maximize saving lives, casualties must be systematically triaged to determine what medical interventions are needed, the nature of those interventions, and who requires intervention immediately. In the National Strategy for Improving the Response and Recovery for an Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) Attack, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security recognized laboratory capacity for radiation biodosimetry as having a significant gap for performing mass radiation dose assessment. The anticipated demand for radiation biodosimetry exceeds its supply, and this gap is partly linked to the limited number and analytical complexity of laboratory methods for determining radiation doses within patients. The dicentric assay is a key component of a cytogenetic biodosimetry response asset, as it has the necessary sensitivity and specificity for assessing medically significant radiation doses. To address these shortfalls, the authors have developed a multimodal strategy to expand dicentric assay capacity. This strategy includes the development of an internet-based cytogenetics network that would address immediately the labor intensive burden of the dicentric chromosome assay by increasing the number of skilled personnel to conduct the analysis. An additional option that will require more time includes improving surge capabilities by combining resources available within the country's 150 clinical cytogenetics laboratories. Key to this intermediate term effort is the fact that geneticists and technicians may be experts in matters related to identifying chromosomal abnormalities related to genetic disorders, but they are not familiar with dosimetry for which training and retraining will be required. Finally, long-term options are presented to improve capacity focus on ways to automate parts of the dicentric chromosome assay method.

Ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses.

Although the spectrum of information related to diagnosis and management of radiation injuries and illnesses is vast and as radiation contamination incidents are rare, most emergency practitioners have had little to no practical experience with such cases. Exposures to ionizing radiation and internal contamination with radioactive materials can cause significant tissue damage and conditions. Emergency practitioners unaware of ionizing radiation as the cause of a condition may miss the diagnosis of radiation-induced injury or illness. This article reviews the pertinent terms, physics, radiobiology, and medical management of radiation injuries and illnesses that may confront the emergency practitioner.

Medical response to a major radiologic emergency: a primer for medical and public health practitioners.

UNLABELLED: There are several types of serious nuclear or radiologic emergencies that would require a specialized medical response. Four scenarios of great public health, economic, and psychologic impact are the detonation of a nuclear weapon, the meltdown of a nuclear reactor, the explosion of a large radiologic dispersal device ("dirty bomb"), or the surreptitious placement of a radiation exposure device in a public area of high population density. With any of these, medical facilities that remain functional may have to deal with large numbers of ill, wounded, and probably contaminated people. Special care and/or handling will be needed for those with trauma, blast injuries, or thermal burns as well as significant radiation exposures or contamination. In addition, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and radiation oncologists will be called on to perform a number of diverse and critically important tasks, including advising political and public health leaders, interfacing with the media, managing essential resources, and, of course, providing medical care. This article describes the medical responses needed following a radiologic or nuclear incident, including the symptoms of and specific treatments for acute radiation syndrome and other early health effects. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.09090330/-/DC1.