Cargando…

Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus

BACKGROUND: Panoramic imaging is one of the most common imaging methods in dentistry. Regarding the side-effects of ionizing radiation, it is necessary to survey different aspects and details of panoramic imaging. In this study, we compared the absorbed x-ray dose around two panoramic x-ray units: P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: A. H., Pakravan, S. M. R., Aghamiri, T., Bamdadian, M., Gholami, M., Moshfeghi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31750266
http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.466
_version_ 1783463858769231872
author A. H., Pakravan
S. M. R., Aghamiri
T., Bamdadian
M., Gholami
M., Moshfeghi
author_facet A. H., Pakravan
S. M. R., Aghamiri
T., Bamdadian
M., Gholami
M., Moshfeghi
author_sort A. H., Pakravan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Panoramic imaging is one of the most common imaging methods in dentistry. Regarding the side-effects of ionizing radiation, it is necessary to survey different aspects and details of panoramic imaging. In this study, we compared the absorbed x-ray dose around two panoramic x-ray units: PM 2002 CC Proline (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) and Cranex Tome (Soredex, Helsinki, Finland). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 15 thermoluminescet dosemeters (TLD-100) were placed in 3 semi-circles of 40cm, 80cm and 120cm radii in order to estimate x-ray dose. Around each unit, the number of TLDs in each semi-circle was 5 with equal intervals. The center of semicircles accords with the patient’s position. Each TLD was exposed 40 times. These dosemeters were read out with a Harshaw Model 4000 TLD Reader (USA). The calibration processing and the reading of dosemeters were performed by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. RESULTS: The mean absorbed dose in three lines of PM 2002 CC Proline was 123.2±15.1, 118.0±11.0 and 108.0±9.1 µSv, (p=0.013). The results were 140.4±15.2, 120.2±10.4 and 111.6±11.2 µSv in Cranex Tome (p=0.208), which reveals no significant difference between two systems. CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences between the mean absorbed dose of surveyed models in panoramic imaging by two units (PM 2002 CC Proline and Cranex Tome). These results were less than occupational exposure recommended by ICRP, even at the highest calculated doses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6820020
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68200202019-11-20 Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus A. H., Pakravan S. M. R., Aghamiri T., Bamdadian M., Gholami M., Moshfeghi J Biomed Phys Eng Original Article BACKGROUND: Panoramic imaging is one of the most common imaging methods in dentistry. Regarding the side-effects of ionizing radiation, it is necessary to survey different aspects and details of panoramic imaging. In this study, we compared the absorbed x-ray dose around two panoramic x-ray units: PM 2002 CC Proline (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland) and Cranex Tome (Soredex, Helsinki, Finland). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 15 thermoluminescet dosemeters (TLD-100) were placed in 3 semi-circles of 40cm, 80cm and 120cm radii in order to estimate x-ray dose. Around each unit, the number of TLDs in each semi-circle was 5 with equal intervals. The center of semicircles accords with the patient’s position. Each TLD was exposed 40 times. These dosemeters were read out with a Harshaw Model 4000 TLD Reader (USA). The calibration processing and the reading of dosemeters were performed by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. RESULTS: The mean absorbed dose in three lines of PM 2002 CC Proline was 123.2±15.1, 118.0±11.0 and 108.0±9.1 µSv, (p=0.013). The results were 140.4±15.2, 120.2±10.4 and 111.6±11.2 µSv in Cranex Tome (p=0.208), which reveals no significant difference between two systems. CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences between the mean absorbed dose of surveyed models in panoramic imaging by two units (PM 2002 CC Proline and Cranex Tome). These results were less than occupational exposure recommended by ICRP, even at the highest calculated doses. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2019-10-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6820020/ /pubmed/31750266 http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.466 Text en Copyright: © Shiraz University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
A. H., Pakravan
S. M. R., Aghamiri
T., Bamdadian
M., Gholami
M., Moshfeghi
Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title_full Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title_fullStr Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title_short Dosimetry of Occupational Radiation around Panoramic X-ray Apparatus
title_sort dosimetry of occupational radiation around panoramic x-ray apparatus
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6820020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31750266
http://dx.doi.org/10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.466
work_keys_str_mv AT ahpakravan dosimetryofoccupationalradiationaroundpanoramicxrayapparatus
AT smraghamiri dosimetryofoccupationalradiationaroundpanoramicxrayapparatus
AT tbamdadian dosimetryofoccupationalradiationaroundpanoramicxrayapparatus
AT mgholami dosimetryofoccupationalradiationaroundpanoramicxrayapparatus
AT mmoshfeghi dosimetryofoccupationalradiationaroundpanoramicxrayapparatus