Comparison of Patient Skin Dose Evaluated Using Radiochromic Film and Dose Calculation Software.

PURPOSE: To compare, in an interventional radiology setting, peak skin doses (PSDs) delivered as calculated using a dedicated software tool and as measured using radiochromic film. To assess the utility of this dose calculation software tool in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: First, radiochromic films were positioned on the examination table in the back of an adult anthropomorphic phantom to measure PSD, and X-ray examinations were simulated. Then, films were again positioned in the patient's back for 59 thoracic or abdominopelvic endovascular interventions. The results obtained with the radiochromic films were taken as a reference and were statistically compared with those of the software. RESULTS: With measured PSDs ranging from 100 to 7000 mGy, the median software-film difference was 8.5%. Lin's concordance coefficient was 0.98 [0.97; 0.99] (p < 0.001), meaning that concordance was excellent between the two methods. For the films where PSD exceeded 1000 mGy, the median difference in the measured value was 8.7% [- 1.3; 21.1], with a maximum discrepancy of 34%. Lin's concordance coefficient was 0.98 [0.96; 1] (p < 0.001), meaning that concordance was excellent between the two methods. CONCLUSION: Comparison between radiochromic films and the software tool showed that the software is a suitable tool for a simple and reliable estimation of PSD. The software seems to be a good alternative to films, whose use remains complex.

Use of a prototype radioprotection cabin in vascular neuroradiology: Dosimetry and ergonomics.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work was to compare the performance of a prototype radioprotection cabin in interventional neuroradiology, and to assess its suitability for routine use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The radioprotection cabin was a prototype derived from the CATHPAX AF(®) model. Three operators carried out 21 procedures (19 brain arteriographies and 2 embolizations) using the radioprotection cabin and not wearing the usual lead individual protection equipment (IPE), and 17 procedures (16 brain arteriographies and 1 embolization) wearing the standard lead IPE (vest, skirt, thyroid shield and goggles), and not using the radioprotection cabin. In all cases, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were positioned at head, trunk, pelvic region, and upper and lower limbs to measure the dose equivalent for Hp(0.07) or Hp(3) that they received, attenuated by either the cabin or the lead IPE. Parallel to these dosimetric measurements, the ergonomics of the protection cabin were appraised by each radiologist after each procedure. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The cabin procured an overall reduction of 74% of the dose received on the whole body with Hp(0.07)=0.04 mSv ± 0.01 (CL=95%) against Hp(0.07)=0.12 mSv ± 0.04 (CL=95%) for the IPE. Body protection with the cabin was near complete, and close to 100% for the regions not protected by the usual IPE (e.g. the head). We also showed that design weaknesses noted by the operators that hampered procedures (light reflections, reduced hand mobility, awkward access to radioscopy pedal) could be remedied by maker's improvements to the prototype and minor changes in work habits.