Main Article Content
Objective: Exposure to ionizing radiation during radiographic examination is associated with some biological effects. The study was aimed to determine the amount of scatter radiation to the breast during lumbosacral x-ray examination.
Materials and Methods: The study was a prospective, cross-sectional study carried out among 60 women referred for Lumbosacral spine radiography from September 2019 to December 2019. Ethical approval was granted by the hospital ethical committee. A single-phase mobile X-ray unit was used to dispense the radiation while a thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) chip was used to measure the radiation dose. The TLD chip was attached to the peri-areolar region of the left breast and held in place by a transparent adhesive tape. The TLD was carefully enclosed in a black polythene sachet before and after the investigation to shield it from background radiation. After the investigation the TLD,s were sent to the Centre for Energy Research and Training (CERT) for reading and annealing.
Results: The mean age and BMI of participants were 55.32±12.35years and 29.70±7.09kg/m2 respectively. The cumulative mean (±SD) ESD to the breast was 3.87±0.87mGy. The highest scatter radiation dose was observed in the age group 60-69 years. Pearson’s correlation showed a week correlation between age and ESD.
Conclusion: The study showed that there were scatter radiations to the breast during lumbosacral X-Ray investigations which was was lowest among the age group 50-59years. No significant difference was seen between AP and lateral positions. The cancer risk was 1 in 6,000 indicating that there might be needed to shield the breast while performing lumbosacral X-ray.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
2. Adejoh, T, An Inquest into the Quests and Conquests of the Radiography Profession in Nigeria. Journal of Radiography &Radiation Sciences, 2018;32(1):1 – 38
3. Robinson ED, Nzotta CC, Onwuchekwa I. Evaluation of scatter radiation to the thyroid gland attributable to brain computed tomography scan in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Int J Res Med Sci 2019;7(2)530-5
4. Stephen AE. Jr, Priscilla FB, Kimberly EA, Steven BB, Libby FB, James MH, et al. American College of Radiology White Paper on Radiation Dose in Medicine. Journal of American College of Radiology, 2007; 4:272-284
5. Sharma R, Sharma SD, Pawar S, Chaubey A, Kantharia S, Babu DAR, Radiation dose to patients from x-ray radiographic examinations using computed radiography imaging system. J Med Phys., 2015;40(1):29 – 37.
6. Smith-Bindman R, Moghadassi M, Wilson N, Nelson TR, Boone JM, Cagnon CH et al. Radiation Doses in Consecutive CT Examinations from Five University of California Medical Centers. Radiology. 2015;.277(1):134-41.
7. Foley S.J., McEntee M.F., &Rainford L.A. Establishment of CT diagnostic reference levels in Ireland.British Journal of Radiology, 2012;85(1018):1390 –1397
8. International Commission on Radiological Protection. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP, 2007;37(2-4):1-332
9. Ujah FO, Akaagerger NB, Agba EH, Iortile T.J. A comparative study of patients radiation levels with standard diagnosticreference levels in federal medical centre and Bishop Murray hospitals in Makurdi. Archives of Applied Science Research. 2012;4(2):800-804.
10. Adejoh, T, Ewuzie CO, Ogbonna JK, Nwefuru, OS and Onuegbu,. CN. A Derived Exposure Chart for Computed Radiography in a Negroid Population. Health, 2016;8:(1)963-968.
11. Gunn ML, Kanal KM, Kolokythas O, Anzal Y,. Radiation dose to the thyroid gland and breast from mutidetector computed tomography of the cervical spine: does bismuth shielding with and without a cervical collar reduce dose? J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009;33(6):987 – 990.
12. Brnic Z, Vekic B, Hebrang A, Anic P.Efficacy of breast shielding during CT of the head. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(11):2436 – 2440
13. Brnic Z, Vekic B, Hebrang A, Anic P. Efficacy of breast shielding during CT of the head. Eur Radiol., (2003)13(11):2436 – 2440
14. Kunosic SD, Kunosic SA, Davorin SK, Halilcevic A & Kamenjakovic S. Analysis of Application of Mean Glandular Dose and Factors on Which It Depends to Patients Aged 65 to 80.Journal of Physical Science and Application. 2013;3(6):387-391.
15. Brink JA and Miller DL . U.S. National Diagnostic Reference Levels: Closing the Gap.Radiology, 2015;277(1):3-6.
16. Uzoagulu, A. E. Practical Guide to Writing Research Project Report in Tertiary Institutions. Enugu: Cheston Publishers 2011; https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1857135
17. Data from Radiology Department federal medical center Asaba (unpublished departmental data)
18. Tannor AY. Lumbar Spine X-Ray as a Standard Investigation for all Low back Pain in Ghana: Is It Evidence Based?. Ghana Med J. 2017;51(1):24-29. doi:10.4314/gmj.v51i1.5
19. Usman BO, Oyewole AA, Chom ND, Umar A. Assessment of various lumbosacral spine abnormalities on magnetic resonance imaging scan of patients with low back pain. port Harcourt medical journal 2020;14:(3)78-85
20. Mekis N, Zontar D, Skrk D,. The effect of breast shielding during lumbar spine radiography. Radiol Oncol. 2013; 47(1): 26-31.
21. Fordham LA, Brown ED, Washburn D, Clark RL. Efficacy and feasibility of breast shielding during abdominal fluoroscopic examinations. Acad Radiol. 1997;4(9):639-43. doi: 10.1016/s1076-6332(05)80269-7. PMID: 9288192.
22. Elshami, W., Abuzaid, M.M., Tekin, H.O . Effectiveness of Breast and Eye Shielding During Cervical Spine Radiography: An Experimental Study. Risk Management and Health Policy. 2020;13:697-704
23. Jecl D, Mekiš N. Breast shielding significantly reduces breast dose during thoracic spine radiography 2015; Poster No.: C-0798, ECR 2015 Scientific Exhibit