Abstract
Abstract
Objective
As gonad shielding is currently under debate, this study evaluates the practice, from its introduction in about 1905 until today.
Methods
The literature was searched for developments in shielding and insights into the effects of ionising radiation on gonads. Based on own pre-1927 dose reconstructions, reported doses after 1927, a 2015-report from the European Union and recent own measurements, the effects of technological evolution and optimisation on radiation dose and hereditary risk were assessed.
Results
In the 1900s, gonad shielding was first applied to prevent male sterility, but was discontinued when instrumental developments led to reduced radiation doses. In the 1950s, concerns about hereditary risks intensified and gonad shielding was recommended again, becoming routine worldwide. Imaging-chain improvements over time were considerable: in 2018, the absorbed dose was 0.5% of its 1905 value for the testes and 2% for the ovaries, our optimised effective dose a factor five lower than the value corresponding to the current EU diagnostic reference level, and the reduction in detriment-adjusted risk by shielding less than 1 × 10−6 for women and 5 × 10−6 for men.
Conclusions
Assessment of pelvic doses revealed a large reduction in radiation risks facilitated by technological developments. Optimisation likewise contributed, but unfortunately, its potential was never adequately exploited. Today, using a modern and optimised X-ray system, gonad shielding can be safely discontinued for women. For men, there might be a marginal benefit, but potential negative side-effects may well dominate. Discontinuation of gonad shielding seems therefore justifiable.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Reference91 articles.
1. ICRP, Khong PL, Ringertz H et al (2013) ICRP Publication 121: Radiological protection in paediatric diagnostic and interventional radiology. Ann ICRP 42:1–63
2. IAEA (2018) Radiation protection and safety in medical uses of ionizing radiation. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna
3. NVMBR (2017) Richtlijn Gonadenafscherming voor conventionele radiologie en CT. Utrecht. Available via https://www.nvmbr.nl/publicatiebestanden/NVMBR%20Richtlijn%20Gonadenafscherming%20mei%202017.pdf
4. Marsh RM, Silosky M (2019) Patient shielding in diagnostic imaging: discontinuing a legacy practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212:755–757 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.20508
5. AAPM (2019) AAPM Position Statement on the Use of Patient Gonadal and Fetal Shielding PP32-A. Available via https://www.aapm.org/org/policies/details.asp?id=468&type=PP
Cited by
23 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献