Radiation-Related Injuries and Their Management: An Update

Abstract

Ionizing radiation (in the form of X-rays) is used for the majority of procedures in interventional radiology. This review article aimed at promoting safer use of this tool through a better understanding of radiation dose and radiation effects, and by providing guidance for setting up a quality assurance program. To this end, the authors describe different radiation descriptive quantities and their individual strengths and challenges, as well as the biologic effects of ionizing radiation, including patient-related effects such as tissue reactions (previously known as deterministic effects) and stochastic effects. In this article, the clinical presentation, immediate management, and clinical follow-up of these injuries are also discussed. Tissue reactions are important primarily from the patients' perspective, whereas stochastic effects are most relevant for pediatric patients and from an occupational viewpoint. The factors affecting the likelihood of skin reaction (the most common tissue reaction) are described, and how this condition should be managed is discussed. Setting up a robust quality assurance program around radiation dose is imperative for effective monitoring and reduction of radiation exposure to patients and operators. Recommendations for the pre-, peri-, and postprocedure periods are given, including recommendations for follow-up of high-dose cases. Special conditions such as pregnancy and radiation recall are also discussed.

Keywords

radiation dose - interventional radiology - quality assurance - occupational radiation exposure

• References

• 1 Joiner M, van der Kogel A , eds. Basic Clinical Radiobiology, 4th ed. London: CRC Press; 2009: 11-14
• 2 Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the Radiologist, 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006: 135-136
• 3 The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007; 37 (2-4) 1-332
• 4 Jones AK, Ensor JE, Pasciak AS. How accurately can the peak skin dose in fluoroscopy be determined using indirect dose metrics?. Med Phys 2014; 41 (7) 071913
• 5 Miller DL, Balter S, Schueler BA, Wagner LK, Strauss KJ, Vañó E. Clinical radiation management for fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures. Radiology 2010; 257 (2) 321-332
• 6 Balter S, Hopewell JW, Miller DL, Wagner LK, Zelefsky MJ. Fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures: a review of radiation effects on patients' skin and hair. Radiology 2010; 254 (2) 326-341
• 7 López Aventín D, Gil I, López González DM, Pujol RM. Chronic scalp ulceration as a late complication of fluoroscopically guided cerebral aneurysm embolization. Dermatology 2012; 224 (3) 198-203
• 8 Hymes SR, Strom EA, Fife C. Radiation dermatitis: clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and treatment 2006. J Am Acad Dermatol 2006; 54 (1) 28-46
• 9 Herold DM, Hanlon AL, Hanks GE. Diabetes mellitus: a predictor for late radiation morbidity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999; 43 (3) 475-479
• 10 Koenig TR, Wolff D, Mettler FA, Wagner LK. Skin injuries from fluoroscopically guided procedures: part 1, characteristics of radiation injury. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177 (1) 3-11
• 11 Geleijns J, Wondergem J. X-ray imaging and the skin: radiation biology, patient dosimetry and observed effects. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005; 114 (1-3) 121-125
• 12 Wunderle KA, Sands MJ. Radiation recall after a transarterial hepatic chemoembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (7) 1027-1028
• 13 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement. NCRP Report No. 168, Radiation dose management for fluoroscopically-guided interventional medical procedures; 2010
• 14 Valentin J. Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures. Ann ICRP 2000; 30 (2) 7-67
• 15 van den Aardweg GJ, Hopewell JW, Simmonds RH. Repair and recovery in the epithelial and vascular connective tissues of pig skin after irradiation. Radiother Oncol 1988; 11 (1) 73-82
• 16 Pasciak AS, Jones AK. Does “spreading” skin dose by rotating the C-arm during an intervention work?. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22 (4) 443-452 , quiz 453
• 17 US National Cancer Institute. NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) 4.03; 2010. Available at: http://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_5x7.pdf . Accessed December 8, 2014
• 18 BC Cancer Agency. Symptom management guidelines: radiation dermatitis. Available at: www.bccancer.bc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/5D986439-3614-4F17-9E50-7FECC73C45D1/72956/14RadiationDermatitis.pdf . Revised October 2013. Accessed December 1, 2014
• 19 Panuccio G, Greenberg RK, Wunderle K, Mastracci TM, Eagleton MG, Davros W. Comparison of indirect radiation dose estimates with directly measured radiation dose for patients and operators during complex endovascular procedures. J Vasc Surg 2011; 53 (4) 885-894.e1 , discussion 894
• 20 Miller DL. Overview of contemporary interventional fluoroscopy procedures. Health Phys 2008; 95 (5) 638-644
• 21 Stecker MS, Balter S, Towbin RB , et al; SIR Safety and Health Committee; CIRSE Standards of Practice Committee. Guidelines for patient radiation dose management. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (7, Suppl): S263-S273
• 22 Committee to Assess Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 2006
• 23 Borrás C, Huda W, Orton CG. Point/counterpoint. The use of effective dose for medical procedures is inappropriate. Med Phys 2010; 37 (7) 3497-3500
• 24 Shore RE. Radiation impacts on human health: certain, fuzzy, and unknown. Health Phys 2014; 106 (2) 196-205
• 25 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement. NCRP Report No. 122, Use of Personal Monitors to Estimate Effective Dose Equivalent and Effective Dose to Workers for External Exposure to Low-LET Radiation; 1995