Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Evaluation of Correlation between DAP (Dose-Area Product) Values and Cardiologist Dose during Coronary Angiography Using Monte Carlo Simulation

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors
Reza Fardid 1
Hadi Rezaei 2
Fatemeh Mirzadeh 3
Mohammad Amin Mosleh-Shirazi 4
mehdi saeedimoghadam 5
Sedigheh Sina 6
somayeh delavarifar 7
ashkan salajegheh 7
1 Department of Radiology, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2 Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Faculty of paramedical science , Shiraz University of Medical Sciences.
4 Ionizing and Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
5 Medical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
6 Radiation Research Center, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
7 Department of Radiology, School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
10.22038/ijmp.2020.46707.1742
Abstract
Introduction: The present study investigated the correlations between the patient’s dose-area product (DAP) values and cardiologist’s dose using Monte Carlo simulation. During angiography procedures, patients are exposed to the primary beam; however, the cardiologist is irradiated by the scattered radiation arising from the table and the surrounding equipment. Accordingly, the cardiologist’s dose is directly related to the patient’s dose.
Material and Methods: This study investigated 25 cardiac angiography procedures. In each procedure, the DAP readings and the cardiologist dose as measured using an electronic personal dosimeter placed over the apron were recorded. Moreover, the DAP values and dose received by the cardiologist in the chest region were calculated using the Monte Carlo N-Particle extended code. For the validation of the simulated spectrum, dosimetric measurements were made using a Farmer ionization chamber and a phantom. 
Results: The data obtained from 18 simulations showed that there was a strong linear relationship (R2=0.71) between the two variables of cardiologist’s dose and patient’s DAP. Likewise, the obtained results of dosimetry conducted on the patients in 25 cardiac angiography procedures revealed that there was a strong relationship (R2=0.78) between the two variables.  
Conclusion: The reported correlation rates show the appropriateness of the physician radiation exposure to total patient’s DAP. With respect to the strong correlation coefficient obtained from the simulation method, it is recommended that this method should be verified by dosimetry. The findings of this study showed a linear relationship between the cardiologist’s dose and the total dose of the patient. 
Keywords
Occupational Exposure
Radiation Exposure
Coronary Angiography
Interventional Radiology Monte Carlo
Subjects
  1. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 1996 report to the General Assembly, with scientific annex. 1996.
  2. Staniszewska MA. Coronary Angiography–Technical Recommendations and Radiation Protection. What Should We Know About Prevented, Diagnostic, and Interventional Therapy in Coronary Artery Disease. 2013 Mar 20:291.
  3. Staniszewska MA. Coronary Angiography-Physical and Technical Aspects. Medical University of Lodz. Department of Medical Imaging Techniques Poland: INTECH Open Access Publisher. 2011 Nov 9:81-94.
  4. Picano E, Vañó E, Rehani MM, Cuocolo A, Mont L, Bodi V, et al. The appropriate and justified use of medical radiation in cardiovascular imaging: a position document of the ESC Associations of Cardiovascular Imaging, Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Electrophysiology. European heart journal. 2014 Mar 7;35(10):665-72.
  5. Morrish O, Goldstone K. An investigation into patient and staff doses from X-ray angiography during coronary interventional procedures. Br J Radiol 20081(961):35-45.
  6. Toossi MT, Mehrpouyan M, Nademi H, Fardid R. Preliminary results of an attempt to predict over apron occupational exposure of cardiologists from cardiac fluoroscopy procedures based on DAP (dose area product) values. Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine. 2015 Mar;38(1):83-91.
  7. Raczyński G, Sadowski M. Radiation exposure, dosimetry and staff protection in catheterization laboratory. J Med Diagn Method. 2013;2:1-4.
  8. Fardid R, Bahreyni Toossi MT, Mehrpouyan M, Ghorbani M. Evaluation of occupational radiation exposure of cardiologists in interventional radiography in Mashhad CATHLABs. International Journal of Low Radiation. 2013 Jan 1;9(2):160-8.
  9. Padovani R, Rodella CA. Staff dosimetry in interventional cardiology. Radiation protection dosimetry. 2001 Mar 1;94(1-2):99-103.
  10. Santos W, Júnior A, Maia A. Evaluation of occupational and medical doses on interventional cardiology procedures by Monte Carlo method. Scientia Plena. 2012; 8 (3):1-4.
  11. Sun Z, AbAziz A, Khairuddin Md Yusof A. Radiation-induced noncancer risks in interventional cardiology: optimisation of procedures and staff and patient dose reduction. BioMed research international. 2013 Aug 20;2013.
  12. Warren-Forward H, Cardew P, Smith B, Clack L, McWhirter K, Johnson S, Wessel K. A comparison of dose savings of lead and lightweight aprons for shielding of 99m-Technetium radiation. Radiation protection dosimetry. 2007 Apr 1;124(2):89-96.
  13. Covens P, Berus D, Buls N, Clerinx P, Vanhavere F. Personal dose monitoring in hospitals: global assessment, critical applications and future needs. Radiation protection dosimetry. 2007 Apr 1;124(3):250-9.
  14. Bozkurt A, Bor D. Simultaneous determination of equivalent dose to organs and tissues of the patient and of the physician in interventional radiology using the Monte Carlo method. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 2006 Dec 21;52(2):317.
  15. He W. Monte carlo modeling based patient dose optimization in diagnostic radiology (Doctoral dissertation, Clemson University). 2014.
  16. Kuipers G, Velders XL, Piek JJ. Exposure of cardiologists from interventional procedures. Radiation protection dosimetry. 2010 Aug 1;140(3):259-65.
  17. Kramer R, Khoury HJ, Lopes C, Vieira JW. Equivalent dose to organs and tissues in hysterosalpingography calculated with the FAX (F emale A dult vo X el) phantom. The British journal of radiology. 2006 Nov;79(947):893-9.
  18. Wernli C. External dosimetry: Operational quantities and their measurement. InProceedings of the 11th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA). 2004; 15.
  19. Fardid R, Mirzadeh F, Rezaei H. Occupational doses of cardiologists in cath labs and simulation method. Journal of cancer research and therapeutics. 2017 Oct 1;13(6):901.
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 18, Issue 5
September and October 2021
Pages 306-313

  • Receive Date 05 March 2020
  • Revise Date 10 November 2020
  • Accept Date 24 November 2020