» Articles » PMID: 39854582

Assessment of Scattered and Leakage Radiation from Ultra-portable X-ray Systems in Chest Imaging: An Independent Study

Overview
Date 2025 Jan 24
PMID 39854582
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Ultraportable (UP) X-ray devices are ideal to use in community-based settings, particularly for chest X-ray (CXR) screening of tuberculosis (TB). Unfortunately, there is insufficient guidance on the radiation safety of these devices. This study aims to determine the radiation dose by UP X-ray devices to both the public and radiographers compared to international dose limits. Radiation dose measurements were performed with four UP X-ray devices that met international criteria, utilizing a clinically representative CXR set-up made with a thorax phantom. Scatter and leakage radiation dose were measured at various positions surrounding the phantom and X-ray tube, respectively. These measurements were used to calculate yearly radiation doses for different scenarios based on the median of all UP X-ray devices. From the yearly scatter doses, the minimum distances from the phantom needed to stay below the international public dose limit (1 mSv/year) were calculated. This distance was longest in the direction back towards the X-ray tube and shortest to the left/right sides of the phantom, e.g., 4.5 m and 2.5 m resp. when performing 50 exams/day, at 90 kV, 2.5 mAs and source skin distance (SSD) 1 m. Additional calculations including leakage radiation were conducted at a typical radiographer position (i.e., behind the X-ray tube), with a correction factor for wearing a lead apron. At 2 m behind the X-ray tube, a radiographer wearing a lead apron could perform 106 exams/day at 2.5 mAs and 29 exams/day at 10 mAs (90 kV, SSD 1 m), while keeping his/her radiation dose below the public dose limit (1 mSv/year) and well below the radiographer dose limit (20 mSv/year). In most CXR screening scenarios, the radiation dose of UP X-ray devices can be kept below 1 mSv/year by employing basic radiation safety rules on time, distance and shielding and using appropriate CXR exposure parameters.

References
1.
Lin E . Radiation risk from medical imaging. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010; 85(12):1142-6. PMC: 2996147. DOI: 10.4065/mcp.2010.0260. View

2.
Geric C, Qin Z, Denkinger C, Kik S, Marais B, Anjos A . The rise of artificial intelligence reading of chest X-rays for enhanced TB diagnosis and elimination. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2023; 27(5):367-372. PMC: 10171486. DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.22.0687. View

3.
. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007; 37(2-4):1-332. DOI: 10.1016/j.icrp.2007.10.003. View

4.
Yadav H, Shah D, Sayed S, Horton S, Schroeder L . Availability of essential diagnostics in ten low-income and middle-income countries: results from national health facility surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2021; 9(11):e1553-e1560. PMC: 8526361. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00442-3. View

5.
Vo L, Codlin A, Ngo T, Dao T, Dong T, Mo H . Early Evaluation of an Ultra-Portable X-ray System for Tuberculosis Active Case Finding. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2021; 6(3). PMC: 8482270. DOI: 10.3390/tropicalmed6030163. View