Evelyn L. Oliveira , Monique F. Silva , William S. Santos , Lucio P. Neves , Ana P. Perini
{"title":"蒙特卡罗模拟经皮肾镜取石术中职业性暴露的剂量学评估","authors":"Evelyn L. Oliveira , Monique F. Silva , William S. Santos , Lucio P. Neves , Ana P. Perini","doi":"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This research focuses on estimating the radiation doses delivered to the main and assistant physicians during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) via computer modeling. To achieve this, scenarios were simulated using the Monte Carlo <em>N</em>-Particle 6.2 code in a simulated PCNL procedure setting. The scenarios varied according to the anteroposterior (AP), right anterior oblique, 30° (RAO30) and left anterior oblique, 30° (LAO30) projections. Variations in body mass index (BMI) were modeled using two virtual anthropomorphic phantoms. These different phantoms were employed to study the influence of the BMI factor on the scattered radiation by the patient. The study also assessed the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE) and collective protective equipment (CPE) on reducing radiation doses for the main physician and assistant. The physician and assistant were simulated using a MASH3 virtual phantom. The Siemens SIREMOBIL Compact L fluoroscopic device was modeled, the tube voltage value for all scenarios was 70 kV, as well as the field size was 11 × 11 cm<sup>2</sup>, and the experimental kerma-area product was equal to 27 Gy⋅cm<sup>2</sup>. The effective doses obtained for the main physician ranged from 0.92 to 41.47 μSv. The use of PPE and CPE reduced the effective dose by 94 %. The equivalent doses found for the main physician's eyes varied in a range of 0.172–7.34 mSv, and the use of PPE and CPE resulted in a 98 % reduction in eye dose. The effective doses obtained for the assistant ranged from 0.33 to 13.49 μSv. In all simulated scenarios, the main physician receives an effective dose up to 71 % higher than the assistant. Our study found that oblique projections resulted in higher radiation exposure for the main physician, with the LAO30 projection increasing the dose by 51 % compared to the AP projection.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20861,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","volume":"236 ","pages":"Article 112914"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dosimetric assessment of occupational exposure during percutaneous nephrolithotomy using Monte Carlo simulation\",\"authors\":\"Evelyn L. Oliveira , Monique F. Silva , William S. Santos , Lucio P. Neves , Ana P. Perini\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radphyschem.2025.112914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This research focuses on estimating the radiation doses delivered to the main and assistant physicians during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) via computer modeling. To achieve this, scenarios were simulated using the Monte Carlo <em>N</em>-Particle 6.2 code in a simulated PCNL procedure setting. The scenarios varied according to the anteroposterior (AP), right anterior oblique, 30° (RAO30) and left anterior oblique, 30° (LAO30) projections. Variations in body mass index (BMI) were modeled using two virtual anthropomorphic phantoms. These different phantoms were employed to study the influence of the BMI factor on the scattered radiation by the patient. The study also assessed the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE) and collective protective equipment (CPE) on reducing radiation doses for the main physician and assistant. The physician and assistant were simulated using a MASH3 virtual phantom. The Siemens SIREMOBIL Compact L fluoroscopic device was modeled, the tube voltage value for all scenarios was 70 kV, as well as the field size was 11 × 11 cm<sup>2</sup>, and the experimental kerma-area product was equal to 27 Gy⋅cm<sup>2</sup>. The effective doses obtained for the main physician ranged from 0.92 to 41.47 μSv. The use of PPE and CPE reduced the effective dose by 94 %. The equivalent doses found for the main physician's eyes varied in a range of 0.172–7.34 mSv, and the use of PPE and CPE resulted in a 98 % reduction in eye dose. The effective doses obtained for the assistant ranged from 0.33 to 13.49 μSv. In all simulated scenarios, the main physician receives an effective dose up to 71 % higher than the assistant. Our study found that oblique projections resulted in higher radiation exposure for the main physician, with the LAO30 projection increasing the dose by 51 % compared to the AP projection.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"236 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112914\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiation Physics and Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969806X25004062\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Physics and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969806X25004062","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dosimetric assessment of occupational exposure during percutaneous nephrolithotomy using Monte Carlo simulation
This research focuses on estimating the radiation doses delivered to the main and assistant physicians during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) via computer modeling. To achieve this, scenarios were simulated using the Monte Carlo N-Particle 6.2 code in a simulated PCNL procedure setting. The scenarios varied according to the anteroposterior (AP), right anterior oblique, 30° (RAO30) and left anterior oblique, 30° (LAO30) projections. Variations in body mass index (BMI) were modeled using two virtual anthropomorphic phantoms. These different phantoms were employed to study the influence of the BMI factor on the scattered radiation by the patient. The study also assessed the impact of personal protective equipment (PPE) and collective protective equipment (CPE) on reducing radiation doses for the main physician and assistant. The physician and assistant were simulated using a MASH3 virtual phantom. The Siemens SIREMOBIL Compact L fluoroscopic device was modeled, the tube voltage value for all scenarios was 70 kV, as well as the field size was 11 × 11 cm2, and the experimental kerma-area product was equal to 27 Gy⋅cm2. The effective doses obtained for the main physician ranged from 0.92 to 41.47 μSv. The use of PPE and CPE reduced the effective dose by 94 %. The equivalent doses found for the main physician's eyes varied in a range of 0.172–7.34 mSv, and the use of PPE and CPE resulted in a 98 % reduction in eye dose. The effective doses obtained for the assistant ranged from 0.33 to 13.49 μSv. In all simulated scenarios, the main physician receives an effective dose up to 71 % higher than the assistant. Our study found that oblique projections resulted in higher radiation exposure for the main physician, with the LAO30 projection increasing the dose by 51 % compared to the AP projection.
期刊介绍:
Radiation Physics and Chemistry is a multidisciplinary journal that provides a medium for publication of substantial and original papers, reviews, and short communications which focus on research and developments involving ionizing radiation in radiation physics, radiation chemistry and radiation processing.
The journal aims to publish papers with significance to an international audience, containing substantial novelty and scientific impact. The Editors reserve the rights to reject, with or without external review, papers that do not meet these criteria. This could include papers that are very similar to previous publications, only with changed target substrates, employed materials, analyzed sites and experimental methods, report results without presenting new insights and/or hypothesis testing, or do not focus on the radiation effects.