The use of dose quantities in radiological protection: ICRP publication 147 Ann ICRP 50(1) 2021.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection has recently published a report (ICRP Publication 147;Ann. ICRP50, 2021) on the use of dose quantities in radiological protection, under the same authorship as this Memorandum. Here, we present a brief summary of the main elements of the report. ICRP Publication 147 consolidates and clarifies the explanations provided in the 2007 ICRP Recommendations (Publication 103) but reaches conclusions that go beyond those presented in Publication 103. Further guidance is provided on the scientific basis for the control of radiation risks using dose quantities in occupational, public and medical applications. It is emphasised that best estimates of risk to individuals will use organ/tissue absorbed doses, appropriate relative biological effectiveness factors and dose-risk models for specific health effects. However, bearing in mind uncertainties including those associated with risk projection to low doses or low dose rates, it is concluded that in the context of radiological protection, effective dose may be considered as an approximate indicator of possible risk of stochastic health effects following low-level exposure to ionising radiation. In this respect, it should also be recognised that lifetime cancer risks vary with age at exposure, sex and population group. The ICRP report also concludes that equivalent dose is not needed as a protection quantity. Dose limits for the avoidance of tissue reactions for the skin, hands and feet, and lens of the eye will be more appropriately set in terms of absorbed dose rather than equivalent dose.

ICRP Publication 135: Diagnostic Reference Levels in Medical Imaging.

Abstract ­: The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) first introduced the term 'diagnostic reference level' (DRL) in 1996 in Publication 73. The concept was subsequently developed further, and practical guidance was provided in 2001. The DRL has been proven to be an effective tool that aids in optimisation of protection in the medical exposure of patients for diagnostic and interventional procedures. However, with time, it has become evident that additional advice is needed. There are issues related to definitions of the terms used in previous guidance, determination of the values for DRLs, the appropriate interval for re-evaluating and updating these values, appropriate use of DRLs in clinical practice, methods for practical application of DRLs, and application of the DRL concept to newer imaging technologies. This publication is intended as a further source of information and guidance on these issues. Some terminology has been clarified. In addition, this publication recommends quantities for use as DRLs for various imaging modalities, and provides information on the use of DRLs for interventional procedures and in paediatric imaging. It suggests modifications in the conduct of DRL surveys that take advantage of automated reporting of radiation-dose-related quantities, and highlights the importance of including information on DRLs in training programmes for healthcare workers. The target audience for this publication is national, regional, and local authorities; professional societies; and facilities that use ionising radiation for medical purposes, and responsible staff within these facilities. A full set of the Commission's recommendations is provided.

Eight decades of ICRP recommendations in medicine: a perspective.

Medicine has been intimately associated with ionising radiation since the discovery of x rays in 1895; the first adverse effects of radiation were observed in persons working in research and on medical staff using x rays. Consequently, in 1925, the first International Congress of Radiology considered the need for a protection committee, which was established at its second congress in Stockholm in 1928 and is known today as the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The first ICRP recommendations in 1928 were devoted to the protection of medical staff in the use of x rays for diagnosis and radiotherapy, and radium for radiotherapy. Later, ICRP devoted increased attention to the protection of patients, starting in 1970 with Publication 16 on protection of the patient in x-ray diagnosis, followed by three reports on the broad areas of radiation medicine: diagnostic radiology, radiation therapy, and nuclear medicine. A major change was made at the end of the 20(th) Century with the introduction of a series of short reports, focussed on specific problems and addressing specific medical practices. Since then, as many as 20 reports have been published on issues such as prevention of accidental exposure in radiotherapy, avoidance of radiation injuries from interventional procedures, managing radiation dose in digital radiology and computed tomography, protection in paediatric radiology, and many others.

Radiological protection in ion beam radiotherapy: practical guidance for clinical use of new technology.

Recently introduced technologies in radiotherapy have significantly improved the clinical outcome for patients. Ion beam radiotherapy, involving proton and carbon ion beams, provides excellent dose distributions in targeted tumours, with reduced doses to the surrounding normal tissues. However, careful treatment planning is required in order to maximise the treatment efficiency and minimise the dose to normal tissues. Radiation exposure from secondary neutrons and photons, particle fragments, and photons from activated materials should also be considered for radiological protection of the patient and medical staff. Appropriate maintenance is needed for the equipment and air in the treatment room, which may be activated by the particle beam and its secondary radiation. This new treatment requires complex procedures and careful adjustment of parameters for each patient. Therefore, education and training for the personnel involved in the procedure are essential for both effective treatment and patient protection. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has provided recommendations for radiological protection in ion beam radiotherapy in Publication 127 Medical staff should be aware of the possible risks resulting from inappropriate use and control of the equipment. They should also consider the necessary procedures for patient protection when new technologies are introduced into clinical practice.

Use of effective dose.

International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 103 provided a detailed explanation of the purpose and use of effective dose and equivalent dose to individual organs and tissues. Effective dose has proven to be a valuable and robust quantity for use in the implementation of protection principles. However, questions have arisen regarding practical applications, and a Task Group has been set up to consider issues of concern. This paper focusses on two key proposals developed by the Task Group that are under consideration by ICRP: (1) confusion will be avoided if equivalent dose is no longer used as a protection quantity, but regarded as an intermediate step in the calculation of effective dose. It would be more appropriate for limits for the avoidance of deterministic effects to the hands and feet, lens of the eye, and skin, to be set in terms of the quantity, absorbed dose (Gy) rather than equivalent dose (Sv). (2) Effective dose is in widespread use in medical practice as a measure of risk, thereby going beyond its intended purpose. While doses incurred at low levels of exposure may be measured or assessed with reasonable reliability, health effects have not been demonstrated reliably at such levels but are inferred. However, bearing in mind the uncertainties associated with risk projection to low doses or low dose rates, it may be considered reasonable to use effective dose as a rough indicator of possible risk, with the additional consideration of variation in risk with age, sex and population group.

Prevention of accidental exposure in radiotherapy: the risk matrix approach.

Knowledge and lessons from past accidental exposures in radiotherapy are very helpful in finding safety provisions to prevent recurrence. Disseminating lessons is necessary but not sufficient. There may be additional latent risks for other accidental exposures, which have not been reported or have not occurred, but are possible and may occur in the future if not identified, analyzed, and prevented by safety provisions. Proactive methods are available for anticipating and quantifying risk from potential event sequences. In this work, proactive methods, successfully used in industry, have been adapted and used in radiotherapy. Risk matrix is a tool that can be used in individual hospitals to classify event sequences in levels of risk. As with any anticipative method, the risk matrix involves a systematic search for potential risks; that is, any situation that can cause an accidental exposure. The method contributes new insights: The application of the risk matrix approach has identified that another group of less catastrophic but still severe single-patient events may have a higher probability, resulting in higher risk. The use of the risk matrix approach for safety assessment in individual hospitals would provide an opportunity for self-evaluation and managing the safety measures that are most suitable to the hospital's own conditions.

Tools for risk assessment in radiation therapy.

Radiotherapy has unquestionable benefits, but it is also associated with unique and specific safety issues. It is the only application of radiation in which humans are intentionally delivered very high doses. Safety in radiotherapy remains heavily dependent on human actions. A step-by-step approach is suggested for the prevention of accidental exposures in radiation therapy: (1) allocation of responsibilities to qualified professionals, and design of a quality and safety programme - no radiotherapy practice should be operated without these key elements; (2) use of the lessons from accidental exposures to test whether the quality and safety programme is sufficiently robust against these types of events -publications by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the International Atomic Energy Agency provide a collection of lessons to facilitate this step; and (3) find other latent risks by posing the questions 'What else could go wrong?' or 'What other potential hazards might be present?' in a systematic, anticipative manner - methods to do so are described briefly in ICRP Publication 112.

Turnera diffusa Wild (Turneraceae) recovers sexual behavior in sexually exhausted males.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: In folk medicine, Turnera diffusa Wild (Turnera diffusa, Turneraceae) is considered as an aphrodisiac, but its ability to restore copulation in sexually inhibited subjects has not been reported. AIM OF THE STUDY: To determine whether Turnera diffusa recovers sexual behavior in sexually exhausted (SExh) male rats and to identify the main components in an aqueous extract. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SExh males were treated with Turnera diffusa, 20-80 mg/kg, yohimbine, 2 mg/kg, or vehicle. RESULTS: Yohimbine and Turnera diffusa (80 mg/kg) significantly increased the percentage of males achieving one ejaculatory series and resuming a second one. In addition, Turnera diffusa significantly reduced the post-ejaculatory interval. These effects were not associated to an increase in locomotor activity or anxiety-like behaviors. The HPLC-ESI-MS analysis showed the presence of caffeine, arbutine, and flavonoids as the main compounds in the active extract. CONCLUSION: The results support the use of Turnera diffusa as an aphrodisiac in traditional medicine and suggest possible therapeutic properties of Turnera diffusa on sexual dysfunction. The flavonoids present in active extract may participate in its pro-sexual effect, which is analogous to those produced by yohimbine, suggesting a shared mechanism of action.

ICRP publication 112. A report of preventing accidental exposures from new external beam radiation therapy technologies.

Disseminating the knowledge and lessons learned from accidental exposures is crucial in preventing re-occurrence. This is particularly important in radiation therapy; the only application of radiation in which very high radiation doses are deliberately given to patients to achieve cure or palliation of disease. Lessons from accidental exposures are, therefore, an invaluable resource for revealing vulnerable aspects of the practice of radiotherapy, and for providing guidance for the prevention of future occurrences. These lessons have successfully been applied to avoid catastrophic events with conventional technologies and techniques. Recommendations, for example, include the independent verification of beam calibration and independent calculation of the treatment times and monitor units for external beam radiotherapy, and the monitoring of patients and their clothes immediately after brachytherapy. New technologies are meant to bring substantial improvement to radiation therapy. However, this is often achieved with a considerable increase in complexity, which in turn brings opportunities for new types of human error and problems with equipment. Dissemination of information on these errors or mistakes as soon as it becomes available is crucial in radiation therapy with new technologies. In addition, information on circumstances that almost resulted in serious consequences (near-misses) is also important, as the same type of events may occur elsewhere. Sharing information about near-misses is thus a complementary important aspect of prevention. Lessons from retrospective information are provided in Sections 2 and 4 of this report. Disseminating lessons learned for serious incidents is necessary but not sufficient when dealing with new technologies. It is of utmost importance to be proactive and continually strive to answer questions such as 'What else can go wrong', 'How likely is it?' and 'What kind of cost-effective choices do I have for prevention?'. These questions are addressed in Sections 3 and 5 of this report. Section 6 contains the conclusions and recommendations. This report is expected to be a valuable resource for radiation oncologists, hospital administrators, medical physicists, technologists, dosimetrists, maintenance engineers, radiation safety specialists, and regulators. While the report applies specifically to new external beam therapies, the general principles for prevention are applicable to the broad range of radiotherapy practices where mistakes could result in serious consequences for the patient and practitioner.

A pilot study exploring the possibility of establishing guidance levels in x-ray directed interventional procedures.

This article summarizes the dosimetric results of an International Atomic Energy Agency coordinated research program to investigate the feasibility of adopting guidance levels for invasive coronary artery procedures. The main study collected clinical data from hospitals located in five countries. A total of 2265 coronary angiograms (CA) and 1844 percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were analyzed. Substudies evaluated the dosimetric performance of 14 fluoroscopes, skin dose maps obtained using film, the quality of CA procedures, and the complexity of PCI procedures. Kerma-area product (PKA) guidance levels of 50 and 125 Gy cm2 are suggested for CA and PCI procedures. These levels should be adjusted for the complexity of the procedures performed in a given institution.

Patient dosimetry in diagnostic and interventional radiology: a practical approach using trigger levels.

Patient dosimetry is performed in radiology and interventional radiology to assess whether deterministic injuries may occur and to establish the risk of stochastic effects. A fundamental problem for patient dosimetry is that no single quantity can be used to accurately assess both the risk of stochastic effects and whether deterministic injuries will occur following a specific examination or procedure. In cardiology and interventional radiology, two different approaches to patient dosimetry are commonly used. Effective dose is a quantity which correlates reasonably well with the risk of stochastic effects. Effective dose may be deduced from the dose-area product (DAP) for the procedure if sufficient information is known. DAP does not correlate with maximum skin dose, which may be used to predict whether deterministic injuries may occur. DAP meter readings may be used as a trigger level for the investigation of maximum skin entrance dose. Trigger levels for different procedures are proposed.