HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Erratum (v218,p920) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nikolic, B. Articles by Abbara, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nikolic, B. Articles by Abbara, S.

Patient Radiation Dose Associated with Uterine Artery Embolization¹

¹ From the Departments of Radiology (B.N., J.B.S., S.A.) and Radiation Oncology and Radiotherapy (M.J.L.), Georgetown University Hospital, 3800 Reservoir Rd, NW, Washington, DC 20007. From the 1998 RSNA scientific assembly. Received October 16, 1998; revision requested December 29; final revision received April 15, 1999; accepted July 27. Address reprint requests to B.N. (e-mail: Nikolic@medlib.georgetown.edu).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the estimated absorbed radiation doses to the ovaries and skin entrance during uterine artery embolization (UAE) for leiomyomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiation dose was measured in 20 patients who underwent UAE for leiomyomas. Measurements were obtained by placing lithium fluoride dosimeters both into the posterior fornix of the vagina and on the skin at the beam entrance site. Patient doses were obtained with thermoluminescent dosimeters.

RESULTS: The mean fluoroscopic time was 21.89 minutes, and the mean number of angiographic exposures was 44. The mean estimated absorbed ovarian dose was 22.34 cGy, and the mean absorbed skin dose was 162.32 cGy. These values compare to published values for the assessed absorbed ovarian dose during hysterosalpingography (0.04–0.55 cGy), fallopian tube recanalization (0.2–2.75 cGy), computed tomography of the trunk (0.1–1.9 cGy), and pelvic irradiation for Hodgkin disease (263–3,500 cGy).

CONCLUSION: The estimated absorbed ovarian dose during UAE is greater than that during common fluoroscopic procedures. On the basis of the known risks of pelvic irradiation for Hodgkin disease, the dose associated with UAE is unlikely to result in acute or long-term radiation injury to the patient or to a measurable increase in the genetic risk to the patient's future children.

Index terms: Interventional procedures, technology, 854.1264, 989.1264 • Ovary, 852.47 • Radiations, exposure to patients and personnel, 852.47, 854.47 • Radiations, injurious effects, 852.47, 854.47 • Uterine neoplasms, therapy, 854.1264

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Nishizawa, Y. Masuda, K. Morinaga, S. Suzuki, S. Kikuyama, T. Yoshida, M. Ohno, K. Akahane, and K. Iwai SURFACE DOSE MEASUREMENT IN PATIENTS AND PHYSICIANS AND EFFECTIVE DOSE ESTIMATION IN PATIENTS DURING UTERINE ARTERY EMBOLISATION Radiat Prot Dosimetry, March 12, 2008; (2008) ncm383v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. REYNOLDS Diagnosis and Management Of Uterine Fibroids Radiol. Technol., November 1, 2007; 79(2): 157 - 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Al-Hendy and S. Salama Gene therapy and uterine leiomyoma: a review Hum. Reprod. Update, July 1, 2006; 12(4): 385 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Vetter, F. W. Schultz, E.-P. Strecker, and J. Zoetelief Optimisation strategies and justification: an example in uterine artery embolisation for fibroids Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 50 - 53. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Schiemann, R. Killmann, M. Kleen, N. Abolmaali, J. Finney, and T. J. Vogl Vascular Guide Wire Navigation with a Magnetic Guidance System: Experimental Results in a Phantom Radiology, August 1, 2004; 232(2): 475 - 481. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J L Hughes and J F Reidy Imaging and treatment of uterine fibroids including the role of uterine artery embolisation Imaging, June 1, 2003; 15(2): 79 - 88. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. LaBerge, B. Nikolic, J. B. Spies, M. J. Lundsten, and S. Abbara Reporting Radiation Dose for Uterine Artery Embolization Dr Nikolic and colleagues respond: Radiology, March 1, 2001; 218(3): 917 - 918. [Full Text]

				R. T. Andrews and P. H. Brown Uterine Arterial Embolization: Factors Influencing Patient Radiation Exposure Radiology, December 1, 2000; 217(3): 713 - 722. [Abstract] [Full Text]