Skip Navigation


Radiation Protection Dosimetry Advance Access originally published online on February 3, 2006
Radiation Protection Dosimetry 2005 117(1-3):50-53; doi:10.1093/rpd/nci717
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
117/1-3/50    most recent
nci717v2
nci717v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vetter, S.
Right arrow Articles by Zoetelief, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vetter, S.
Right arrow Articles by Zoetelief, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Optimisation strategies and justification: an example in uterine artery embolisation for fibroids

S. Vetter1,*, F. W. Schultz2, E.-P. Strecker1 and J. Zoetelief2

1 Department of Radiology, Diakonissenkrankenhaus, Diakonissenstrasse 28, D-76199 Karlsruhe, Germany
2 Interfaculty Reactor Institute, Medical Physics, Delft University of Technology, NL-2629 JB Delft, The Netherlands

* Corresponding author: radiologie{at}diak-ka.de

Radiation risk has to be justified and optimised. This study discusses the radiation risk of uterine artery embolisation (UAE) for the treatment of fibroids. A total of 70 consecutive UAE dosimetry parameters were assessed. Using Monte Carlo simulation, organ and effective doses and dose conversion coefficients (DCCs) (mSv Gy cm–2) were calculated. During UAE optimisation, avoidance of oblique views and use of last-image-hold (LIH) documentation instead of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were investigated. Mean dose–area product (DAP) was 37.1 Gy cm2 (median 23.7 Gy cm2) and mean fluoroscopy time was 18.4 min (median 16.6 min). Dose values decreased as the study progressed: mean DAP for patients 1–21, 68.5 Gy cm2; patients 22–43, 35.7 Gy cm2; and patients 44–69, 13.0 Gy cm2. Average DCC for DSA image procedures was 0.572, yielding a mean effective dose of 29.6 mSv (median 17.1 mSv). For LIH-only procedures, an average DCC of 0.813 was estimated [using mean effective dose: 10.6 mSv (median 8.1 mSv)].


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.