• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.32-36
• /
• 2016

Purpose In nuclear medicine examination, $^{131}I$ is widely used in nuclear medicine examination such as diagnosis, treatment, and others of thyroid cancer and other diseases. $^{131}I$ conducts examination and treatment through emission of ${\gamma}$ ray and ${\beta}^-$ ray. Since $^{131}I$ (364 keV) contains more energy compared to $^{99m}Tc$ (140 keV) although it displays high integrated rate and enables quick discharge through kidney, the objective of this study lies in comparing the difference in exposure dose of $^{131}I$ before and after wearing apron when handling $^{131}I$ with focus on 3 elements of external exposure protection that are distance, time, and shield in order to reduce the exposure to technicians in comparison with $^{99m}Tc$ during the handling and administration process. When wearing apron (in general, Pb 0.5 mm), $^{99m}Tc$ presents shield of over 90% but shielding effect of $^{131}I$ is relatively low as it is of high energy and there may be even more exposure due to influence of scattered ray (secondary) and bremsstrahlung in case of high dose. However, there is no special report or guideline for low dose (74 MBq) high energy thus quantitative analysis on exposure dose of technicians will be conducted based on apron wearing during the handling of $^{131}I$. Materials and Methods With patients who visited Department of Nuclear Medicine of our hospital for low dose $^{131}I$ administration for thyroid cancer and diagnosis for 7 months from Jun 2014 to Dec 2014 as its subject, total 6 pieces of TLD was attached to interior and exterior of apron placed on thyroid, chest, and testicle from preparation to administration. Then, radiation exposure dose from $^{131}I$ examination to administration was measured. Total procedure time was set as within 5 min per person including 3 min of explanation, 1 min of distribution, and 1 min of administration. In regards to TLD location selection, chest at which exposure dose is generally measured and thyroid and testicle with high sensitivity were selected. For preparation, 74 MBq of $^{131}I$ shall be distributed with the use of $2m{\ell}$ syringe and then it shall be distributed after making it into dose of $2m{\ell}$ though dilution with normal saline. When distributing $^{131}I$ and administering it to the patient, $100m{\ell}$ of water shall be put into a cup, distributed $^{131}I$ shall be diluted, and then oral administration to patients shall be conducted with the distance of 1m from the patient. The process of withdrawing $2m{\ell}$ syringe and cup used for oral administration was conducted while wearing apron and TLD. Apron and TLD were stored at storage room without influence of radiation exposure and the exposure dose was measured with request to Seoul Radiology Services. Results With the result of monthly accumulated exposure dose of TLD worn inside and outside of apron placed on thyroid, chest, and testicle during low dose $^{131}I$ examination during the research period divided by number of people, statistics processing was conducted with Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test using SPSS Version. 12.0K. As a result, it was revealed that there was no significant difference since all of thyroid (p = 0.345), chest (p = 0.686), and testicle (p = 0.715) were presented to be p > 0.05. Also, when converting the change in total exposure dose during research period into percentage, it was revealed to be -23.5%, -8.3%, and 19.0% for thyroid, chest, and testicle respectively. Conclusion As a result of conducting Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, it was revealed that there is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). Also, in case of calculating shielding rate with accumulate exposure dose during 7 months, it was revealed that there is irregular change in exposure dose for inside and outside of apron. Although the degree of change seems to be high when it is expressed in percentage, it cannot be considered a big change since the unit of accumulated exposure dose is in decimal points. Therefore, regardless of wearing apron during high energy low dose $^{131}I$ administration, placing certain distance and terminating the administration as soon as possible would be of great assistance in reducing the exposure dose. Although this study restricted $^{131}I$ administration time to be within 5 min per person and distance for oral administration to be 1m, there was a shortcoming to acquire accurate result as there was insufficient number of N for statistics and it could be processed only through non-parametric method. Also, exposure dose per person during lose dose $^{131}I$ administration was measured with accumulated exposure dose using TLD rather than through direct-reading exposure dose thus more accurate result could be acquired when measurement is conducted using electronic dosimeter and pocket dosimeter.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.247-256
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate anal sphincter preservation rates, survival rates, and prognostic factors in patients with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Materials and Methods: One hundred fifty patients with pathologic confirmed rectal cancer and treated by preoperative chemoradiotherapy between January 1999 and June 2007. Of the 150 patients, the 82 who completed the scheduled chemoradiotherapy, received definitive surgery at our hospital, and did not have distant metastasis upon initial diagnosis were enrolled in this study. The radiation dose delivered to the whole pelvis ranged from 41.4 to 46.0 Gy (median 44.0 Gy) using daily fractions of $1.8{\sim}2.0\;Gy$ at 5 days per week and a boost dose to the primary tumor and high risk area up to a total of $43.2{\sim}54\;Gy$ (median 50.4 Gy). Sixty patients (80.5%) received 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and cisplatin, while 16 patients (19.5%) were administered 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin every 4 weeks concurrently during radiotherapy. Surgery was performed for 3 to 45 weeks (median 7 weeks) after completion of chemoradiotherapy. Results: The sphincter preservation rates for all patients were 73.2% (60/82). Of the 48 patients whose tumor was located at less than 5 cm away from the anal verge, 31 (64.6%) underwent sphincter-saving surgery. Moreover, of the 34 patients whose tumor was located at greater than or equal to 5 cm away from the anal verge, 29 (85.3%) were able to preserve their anal sphincter. A pathologic complete response was achieved in 14.6% (12/82) of all patients. The downstaging rates were 42.7% (35/82) for the T stage, 75.5% (37/49) for the N stage, and 67.1% (55/82) for the overall stages. The median follow-up period was 38 months (range $11{\sim}107$ months). The overall 5-year survival, disease-free survival, and locoregional control rates were 67.4%, 58.9% and 84.4%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates based on the pathologic stage were 100% for stage 0 (n=12), 59.1% for stage I (n=16), 78.6% for stage II (n=30), 36.9% for stage III (n=23), and one patient with pathologic stage IV was alive for 43 months (p=0.02). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 77.8% for stage 0, 63.6% for stage I, 58.9% for stage II, 51.1% for stage III, and 0% for stage IV (p<0.001). The 5-year locoregional control rates were 88.9% for stage 0, 93.8% for stage I, 91.1% for stage II, 68.2% for stage III, and one patient with pathologic stage IV was alive without local recurrence (p=0.01). The results of a multivariate analysis with age (${\leq}55$ vs. >55), clinical stage (I+II vs. III), radiotherapy to surgery interval (${\leq}6$ weeks vs. >6 weeks), operation type (sphincter preservation vs. no preservation), pathologic T stage, pathologic N stage, pathologic overall stage (0 vs. I+II vs. III+IV), and pathologic response (complete vs. non-CR), only age and pathologic N stage were significant predictors of overall survival, pathologic overall stage for disease-free survival, and pathologic N stage for locoregional control rates, respectively. Recurrence was observed in 25 patients (local recurrence in 10 patients, distant metastasis in 13 patients, and both in 2 patients). Acute hematologic toxicity ($\geq$grade 3) during chemoradiotherapy was observed in 2 patients, while skin toxicity was observed in 1 patient. Complications developing within 60 days after surgery and required admission or surgical intervention, were observed in 11 patients: anastomotic leakage in 5 patients, pelvic abscess in 2 patients, and others in 4 patients. Conclusion: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was an effective modality to achieve downstaging and sphincter preservation in rectal cancer cases with a relatively low toxicity. Pathologic N stage was a statistically significant prognostic factor for survival and locoregional control and so, more intensified postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered in these patients.