@@

Objective:To analyze the eye lens dose and annual effective dose to interventional radiation workers in some hospitals of Xinxiang city from 2020 to 2022, and to ascertain the dose to interventional radiation workers.Methods:By using TLDs, the eye lens dose Hp(3) and annual effective dose Hp(10) were monitored for three consecutive years in six hospitals in Xinxiang city. The lens doses and annual effective doses to intervention radiation workers in different years in different-level hospitals and departments were analyzed. Results:From 2020 to 2022, a total of 117 people were monitored. The left eye lens dose range was 0.12-164.24 mSv, and the right eye lens dose range was 0.07-51.64 mSv. The average annual dose was 8.56 mSv for left eye lens and 4.49 mSv for right eye lens The average annual dose distribution in the MDL-5 mSv range for the left and right eye lens was 60.68% and 73.50%, respectively. 9.41% (11 people) of the left eye lens doses exceeded 20 mSv. The annual effective doses range was 0.11-31.27 mSv, with average annual dose of 2.56 mSv. The proportion of average annual effective doses mainly distributed in the range of MDL to 1.25 mSv was 52.14%, with 2.56% annual effective dose exceeding 20 mSv. There was no significant difference in left and right eye lens dose and annual effective dose between the tertiary hospitals and the secondary hospitals in three years ( P>0.05). Compared with different departments, the cumulative per capita dose in three years was statistically significant (left eye H=11.42, right eye H=13.72, annual effective dose H=25.94, P<0.05). The lens dose and annual effective dose in neurology department were lower than those in cardiology department and comprehensive intervention department ( Zcardiology department=-3.33, -3.78, -4.83, P<0.05; Zcomprehensive intervention department=-2.71, -2.63, -4.39, P<0.05). Conclusions:Most of the annual equivalent dose and annual effective dose to eye lens of the interventional radiation workers in Xinxiang city meet the national limits, but some of them have higher doses and exceed the national limits. It is suggested that the routine and continuous monitoring of eye lens doses to interventional radiologists should be strengthened while routine monitoring of annual effective dose, and attention should be paid to the eye lens and annual effective dose to interventional radiologists in secondary hospitals to improve the awareness of protection.

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.