کاربرد مواد جایگزین سرب در حفاظ‌های بکار رفته برای تضعیف پرتوهای ایکس و گاما در محدوده‌ی انرژی‌های رادیولوژی تشخیصی: مقاله‌ی مروری

نوع مقاله : مقاله مروری

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه رادیولوژی، دانشکده‌ی پیراپزشکی، و عضو هیأت علمی مرکز تحقیقات حفاظت در برابر پرتوهای یون‌ساز و غیر یون‌ساز، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شیراز، شیراز، ایران

2 استاد، گروه فیزیک و مهندسی پزشکی، دانشکده‌ی پزشکی، و عضو هیأت علمی مرکز تحقیقات حفاظت در برابر پرتوهای یون‌ساز و غیر یون‌ساز، دانشکده‌ی پیراپزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شیراز، شیراز، ایران

3 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه رادیولوژی، دانشکده‌ی پیراپزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شیراز، شیراز، ایران

چکیده

مقاله مروری




سرب، پرکاربردترین ماده برای ساخت حفاظ‌های پرتویی در بخش‌های رادیولوژی تشخیصی می‌باشد، زیرا توانایی آن در تضعیف پرتوهای ایکس به دلیل عدد اتمی و چگالی بالا نسبت به سایر مواد برتر بوده و از لحاظ اقتصادی مقرون به صرفه‌تر می‌باشد. از طرفی، حفاظ‌های سربی معایب جدی مانند سمیت و وزن بالا، انعطاف‌پذیری و پایداری کمی دارند. لذا لزوم استفاده از حفاظ‌های عاری از سرب، توسط محققین در سال‌های اخیر به طور جدی مطرح شده است. هدف از این مطالعه، مروری بر مواد و ترکیبات جایگزین سرب در محافظ‌های پرتویی و همچنین میزان اثربخشی آن‌ها در رفع محدودیت‌های حفاظ‌های سربی رایج می‌باشد. در بین جستجوهای صورت گرفته در پایگاه‌های داده‌ای از قبیل Google Scholar, Web of Science, Medline, Scopus و Embase با کلید واژه‌های حفاظت در برابر اشعه، حفاظ‌های غیرسربی، پرتونگاری تشخیصی، در مجموع 83 مقاله مورد مطالعه قرار گرفت. با توجه به طیف گسترده‌ی مواد قابل استفاده در حفاظ‌های پرتویی، نتایج نشان می‌دهند علاوه بر عدد اتمی، سایز ذرات نیز می‌تواند در افزایش قابلیت حفاظ‌ها مؤثر واقع شود تا جایی که ترکیبات پیشنهاد شده در سایز نانو بازده تضعیف پرتوی بیشتری داشتند. همچنین در مقایسه با حفاظ‌های تک ماده و یا ترکیب‌های پلیمری رایج، کامپوزیت‌های پلیمری چند لایه، احتمال نفوذ اشعه‌ی ایکس را به طور مؤثرتری کاهش داده‌اند. تحقیقات برای یافتن مواد جایگزین سرب و بهینه‌سازی حفاظ‌های پرتویی همچنان ادامه دارد زیرا دستیابی به حفاظ سبک، منعطف، ارزان و با قابلیت تضعیف بالا در کل طیف انرژی‌های تشخیصی دشوار می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Application of Lead Substitute Shielding Materials for X and Gamma-Rays Attenuation in Diagnostic Radiology: A Review Article

نویسندگان [English]

  • Arash Safari 1
  • Seyed Mohammad Javad Mortazavi 2
  • Pouya Saraei 3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, School of Paramedical Sciences, AND Ionizing and Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2 Professor, Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, AND Ionizing and Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
3 MSc Student, Department of Radiology, School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده [English]

Lead is the most widely used material for radiation protection in diagnostic radiology because its ability to attenuate x-rays is superior to other materials due to its high atomic number, high density, and its higher economic affordability. However, lead shields have serious disadvantages, such as high toxicity, heavy weight, poor flexibility, and low chemical stability. These disadvantages have oriented extensive research toward the use of non-lead composite shields. This study aims to review the materials and compounds proposed as alternatives to lead in x-ray shields and investigate their effectiveness in removing the limitations of standard lead shields. In total, 83 articles were reviewed using databases such as Google Scholar, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase with the keywords of radiation protection, lead-free shields, and dianostic radiology. Since a wide range of materials can be used as radiation shields, the results show that in addition to the atomic number, the size of the particles can also be effective in increasing the radiation attenuation efficiency to the extent that the nano-sized non-lead shields have been more effective in radiation protection. Also, compared to common single and combined materials, multilayer polymer composites have better photon attenuation capability and reduce the possibility of x-ray penetration more effectively. Research to find appropriate alternative materials for lead and the optimization of the efficacy of radiation shields, should be continued, as it is difficult to achieve a light, flexible, low cost shield with a high x-ray attenuation in the entire range of diagnostic photon energies.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Radiation protection
  • Lead-free shields
  • Diagnostic radiology

مراجع

  1. Duggar BM. Grants in support of research on the biological effects of radiation. Science 1938; 87(2266): 507-8.
  2. Kim JH. Three principles for radiation safety: time, distance, and shielding. Korean J Pain 2018; 31(3): 145.
  3. Hashemi SA, Mousavi SM, Faghihi R, Arjmand M, Sina S, Amani AM. Lead oxide-decorated graphene oxide/epoxy composite towards X-Ray radiation shielding. Radiat Phys Chem 2018; 146: 77-85.
  4. Farhood B, Raei B, Malekzadeh R, Shirvani M, Najafi M, Mortezazadeh T. A review of incidence and mortality of colorectal, lung, liver, thyroid, and bladder cancers in Iran and compared to other countries. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2019; 23(1): 7-15.
  5. Ngaile JE, Uiso CBS, Msaki P, Kazema R. Use of lead shields for radiation protection of superficial organs in patients undergoing head CT examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008; 130(4): 490-8.
  6. Lynskey 3rd GE, Powell DK, Dixon RG, Silberzweig JE. Radiation protection in interventional radiology: survey results of attitudes and use. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24(10): 1547-51.e3.
  7. Lakhwani OP, Dalal V, Jindal M, Nagala A. Radiation protection and standardization. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2019; 10(4): 738-43.
  8. Musallam A, Volis I, Dadaev S, Abergel E, Soni A, Yalonetsky S, et al. A randomized study comparing the use of a pelvic lead shield during trans‐radial interventions: Threefold decrease in radiation to the operator but double exposure to the patient. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 85(7): 1164-70.
  9. Finnerty M, Brennan PC. Protective aprons in imaging departments: manufacturer stated lead equivalence values require validation. Eur Radiol 2005; 15(7): 1477-84.
  10. Hyun SJ, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Efficiency of lead aprons in blocking radiation-how protective are they? Heliyon 2016; 2(5): e00117.
  11. Nambiar S, Yeow JT. Polymer-composite materials for radiation protection. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2012; 4(11): 5717-26.
  12. McCaffrey JP, Shen H, Downton B, Mainegra-Hing E. Radiation attenuation by lead and nonlead materials used in radiation shielding garments. Med Phys 2007; 34(2): 530-7.
  13. Saeedi-Moghadam M, Tayebi M, Chegeni N, Sina S, Kolayi T. Efficiency of non-lead and lead thyroid shields in radiation protection of CT examinations. Radiat Phys Chem 2021; 180: 109265.
  14. Tekin HO, Altunsoy EE, Kavaz E, Sayyed MI, Agar O, Kamislioglu M. Photon and neutron shielding performance of boron phosphate glasses for diagnostic radiology facilities. Results Phys 2019; 12: 1457-64.
  15. Scuderi GJ, Brusovanik GV, Campbell DR, Henry RP, Kwon B, Vaccaro AR. Evaluation of non-lead-based protective radiological material in spinal surgery. Spine J 2006; 6(5): 577-82.
  16. Kato M, Chida K, Munehisa M, Sato T, Inaba Y, Suzuki M, et al. Non-lead protective aprons for the protection of interventional radiology physicians from radiation exposure in clinical settings: an initial
    Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11(9): 1613.
  17. Singh C, Singh T, Kumar A, Mudahar GS. Energy and chemical composition dependence of mass attenuation coefficients of building materials. Ann Nucl Energy 2004; 31(10): 1199-205.
  18. Elmahroug Y, Tellili B, Souga C. Determination of total mass attenuation coefficients, effective atomic numbers and electron densities for different shielding materials. Ann Nucl Energy 2015; 75: 268-74.
  19. Gaikwad DK, Pawar PP, Selvam TP. Mass attenuation coefficients and effective atomic numbers of biological compounds for gamma ray interactions. Radiat Phys Chem 2017; 138: 75-80.
  20. Nickoloff EL, Berman HL. Factors affecting x-ray spectra. Radiographics 1993; 13(6): 1337-48.
  21. Sitko R. Influence of X-ray tube spectral distribution on uncertainty of calculated fluorescent radiation intensity. Spectrochim Acta B: At Spectrosc 2007; 62(8): 777-86.
  22. Ara A, Usmani JA. Lead toxicity: a review. Interdiscip Toxicol 2015; 8(2): 55.
  23. Ahamed M, Siddiqui MKJ. Environmental lead toxicity and nutritional factors. Clin Nutr 2007; 26(4): 400-8.
  24. Murata K, Iwata T, Dakeishi M, Karita K. Lead toxicity: does the critical level of lead resulting in adverse effects differ between adults and children? J Occup Health 2008; 51(1): 1-12.
  25. Moore B, VanSonnenberg E, Casola G, Novelline RA. The relationship between back pain and lead apron use in radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 158(1): 191-3.
  26. Pelz DM. Low back pain, lead aprons, and the angiographer. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21(7): 1364.
  27. Rees CR, Duncan BW. Get the lead off our Backs! Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2018; 21(1): 7-15.
  28. Saritha B, Rao ASN. A study on photon attenuation coefficients of different wood materials with different densities. J Phys: Conference Series 2015: 012030.
  29. Singh AK, Singh RK, Sharma B, Tyagi AK. Characterization and biocompatibility studies of lead free X-ray shielding polymer composite for healthcare application. Radiat Phys Chem 2017; 138: 9-15
  30. Atashi P, Rahmani S, Ahadi B, Rahmati A. Efficient, flexible and lead-free composite based on room temperature vulcanizing silicone rubber/W/Bi2O3 for gamma ray shielding application. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 2018; 29(14): 12306-22.
  31. Molina Higgins MC, Radcliffe NA, Toro-González M, Rojas JV. Gamma ray attenuation of hafnium dioxide-and tungsten trioxide-epoxy resin composites. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 2019; 322(2): 707-16.
  32. Prabhu S, Bubbly SG, Gudennavar SB. X-Ray and γ-Ray shielding efficiency of polymer composites: Choice of fillers, effect of loading and filler size, photon energy and multifunctionality. Polymer Reviews 2022; 1-43.
  33. Li Q, Wei Q, Zheng W, Zheng Y, Okosi N, Wang Z, et al. Enhanced radiation shielding with conformal light-weight nanoparticle-polymer composite. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2018; 10(41): 35510-5.
  34. Adlienė D, Gilys L, Griškonis E. Development and characterization of new tungsten and tantalum containing composites for radiation shielding in medicine. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res B 2020; 467: 21-6.
  35. Dell MA. Radiation safety review for 511-keV emitters in nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med Technol 1997; 25(1): 12-7.
  36. AbuAlRoos NJ, Amin NAB, Zainon R. Conventional and new lead-free radiation shielding materials for radiation protection in nuclear medicine: A review. Radiat Phys Chem 2019; 165: 108439.
  37. McCaffrey JP, Mainegra-Hing E, Shen H. Optimizing non‐Pb radiation shielding materials using bilayers. Med Phys 2009; 36(12): 5586-94.
  38. Livingstone RS, Varghese A. A simple quality control tool for assessing integrity of lead equivalent aprons. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2018; 28(2): 258-62.
  39. Azman NN, Siddiqui SA, Hart R, Low IM. Effect of particle size, filler loadings and x-ray tube voltage on the transmitted x-ray transmission in tungsten oxide-epoxy composites. Appl Radiat Isot 2013; 71(1): 62-7.
  40. Park S, Kim H, Kim Y, Kim E, Seo Y. Multilayer-structured non-leaded metal/polymer composites for enhanced x-ray shielding. MRS Advances 2018; 3(31): 1789-97.
  41. Kim H, Lim J, Kim J, Lee J, Seo Y. Multilayer Structuring of Nonleaded Metal (BiSn)/Polymer/Tungsten Composites for Enhanced γ‐Ray Shielding. Adv Eng Mater 2020; 22(6): 1901448.
  42. Hopper KD, King SH, Lobell ME, TenHave TR, Weaver JS. The breast: in-plane x-ray protection during diagnostic thoracic CT--shielding with bismuth radioprotective garments. Radiology 1997; 205(3): 853-8.
  43. Yue K, Luo W, Dong X, Wang C, Wu G, Jiang M, et al. A new lead-free radiation shielding material for radiotherapy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2009; 133(4): 256-60.
  44. Mukundan Jr S, Wang PI, Frush DP, Yoshizumi T, Marcus J, Kloeblen E, et al. MOSFET dosimetry for radiation dose assessment of bismuth shielding of the eye in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188(6): 1648-50.
  45. Mehnati P, Malekzadeh R, Yousefi Sooteh M. Application of personal non-lead nano-composite shields for radiation protection in diagnostic radiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nanomed. J 2020; 7(3): 170-82.
  46. Mortazavi SMJ, Zahiri A, Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Sina S, Haghani M. Designing a shield with lead-free polymer base with high radiation protection for X-ray photons in the range of diagnostic radiology using monte carlo simulation Code MCNP5 [in Persian]. J Isfahan Med Sch 2016; 34(385): 637-41.
  47. Aghamiri MR, Mortazavi SMJ, Tayebi M, Mosleh-Shirazi M, Baharvand H, Tavakkoli-Golpayegani A, et al. A novel design for production of efficient flexible lead-free shields against X-ray photons in diagnostic energy range. J Biomed Phys Eng 2011; 1(1): 17-21.
  48. Thumwong A, Darachai J, Saenboonruang K. Comparative X-ray shielding properties of single-layered and multi-layered Bi2O3/NR composites: Simulation and numerical studies. Polymers (Basel) 2022; 14(9): 1788.
  49. Poltabtim W, Wimolmala E, Markpin T, Sombatsompop N, Rosarpitak V, Saenboonruang K. X-ray shielding, mechanical, physical, and water absorption properties of wood/PVC composites containing bismuth oxide. Polymers (Basel) 2021; 13(13): 2212.
  50. Yılmaz SN, Güngör A, Özdemir T. The investigations of mechanical, thermal and rheological properties of polydimethylsiloxane/bismuth (III) oxide composite for X/Gamma ray shielding. Radiat Phys Chem 2020; 170: 108649.
  51. Azman NZN, Ramzun MR. Polymeric composites for X-ray shielding applications. In: LowM, Dong Y, editors. Composite materials: Manufacturing, properties and applications. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2021. p. 503-41.
  52. Alshahri S, Alsuhybani M, Alosime E, Almurayshid M, Alrwais A, Alotaibi S. LDPE/bismuth oxide nanocomposite: Preparation, characterization and application in X-ray shielding. Polymers (Basel) 2021; 13(18): 3081.
  53. Almurayshid M, Alssalim Y, Aksouh F, Almsalam R, ALQahtani M, Sayyed M, et al. Development of new lead-free composite materials as potential radiation shields. Materials (Basel) 2021; 14(17): 4957.
  54. Li Z, Zhou W, Zhang X, Gao Y, Guo S. High-efficiency, flexibility and lead-free X-ray shielding multilayered polymer composites: layered structure design and shielding mechanism. Sci Rep 2021; 11(1): 4384.
  55. Gilys L, Griškonis E, Griškevičius P, Adlienė D. Lead free multilayered polymer composites for radiation shielding. Polymers (Basel) 2022; 14(9): 1696.
  56. Sayyed M, Ersundu MÇ, Ersundu AE, Lakshminarayana G, Kostka P. Investigation of radiation shielding properties for MeO-PbCl2-TeO2 (MeO = Bi2O3, MoO3, Sb2O3, WO3, ZnO) glasses. Radiat Phys Chem 2018; 144: 419-25.
  57. Hussein KI, Alqahtani MS, Grelowska I, Reben M, Afifi H, Zahran H, et al. Optically transparent glass modified with metal oxides for X-rays and gamma rays shielding material. J Xray Sci Technol 2021; 29(2): 331-45.
  58. AlBuriahi M, Hegazy HH, Alresheedi F, Olarinoye IO, Algarni H, Tekin HO, et al. Effect of CdO addition on photon, electron, and neutron attenuation properties of boro-tellurite glasses. Ceram Int 2021; 47(5): 5951-8.
  59. Kassab LRP, da Silva Mattos GR, Issa SAM, Bilal G, Bordon CDS, Kilic G, et al. Optical and physical behaviours of newly developed germanium-tellurium (GeTe) glasses: a comprehensive experimental and in-silico study with commercial glasses and ordinary shields. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 2021; 32(18): 22953-73.
  60. Alharshan GA, Alrowaili ZA, Olarinoye IO, Al-Buriahi MS. Holmium (III) oxide and its significant effects on the radiation shielding performance of P2O5 + B2O3 + ZnSO4 optical glasses. Optik 2022; 261: 169188.
  61. Verdipoor K, Alemi A, Mesbahi A. Photon mass attenuation coefficients of a silicon resin loaded with WO 3 , PbO, and Bi 2 O 3 Micro and Nano-particles for radiation shielding. Radiat Phys Chem 2018; 147: 85-90.
  62. Jayakumar S, Saravanan T, Philip J. Preparation, characterization and X-ray attenuation property of Gd2O3-based nanocomposites. Appl Nanosci 2017; 7(8): 919-31.
  63. Mansouri E, Mesbahi A, Malekzadeh R, Mansouri A. Shielding characteristics of nanocomposites for protection against X- and gamma rays in medical applications: effect of particle size, photon energy and nano-particle concentration. Radiat Environ Biophys 2020; 59(4): 583-600.
  64. Thibeault SA, Kang JH, Sauti G, Park C, Fay CC, King GC. Nanomaterials for radiation shielding. Mrs Bulletin 2015; 40(10): 836-41.
  65. Muthamma MV, Prabhu S, Bubbly SG, Gudennavar SB. Micro and nano Bi2O3 filled epoxy composites: Thermal, mechanical and γ-ray attenuation properties. Appl Radiat Isot 2021; 174: 109780.
  66. Hosseini MA, Malekie S, Kazemi F. Experimental evaluation of gamma radiation shielding characteristics of polyvinyl alcohol/tungsten oxide composite: A comparison study of micro and nano sizes of the fillers. NIM-A 2022; 1026: 166214.
  67. Mirji R, Lobo B, Radiation shielding materials: A brief review on methods, scope and significance. Proceedings of the National Conference on ‘Advances in VLSI and Microelectronics. PC Jabin Science College, Huballi, India; 2017.
  68. Künzel R, Okuno E. X-ray spectroscopy applied to the study of the radiation transmission through nano materials. Rev Bras de Ensino de Fis 2011; 5(2): 209-12.
  69. Künzel R, Okuno E. Effects of the particle sizes and concentrations on the X-ray absorption by CuO compounds. Appl Radiat Isot 2012; 70(4): 781-4.
  70. Friedman H, Singh M. Radiation transmission measurements for Demron fabric: United States. Department of Energy; 2003.
  71. Taylor EW. Organics, polymers and nanotechnology for radiation hardening and shielding applications. Proceeding of the Nanophotonics and Macrophotonics for Space Environments; 26 Sep 2007. California, CA: International Society for Optics and Photonics; 2007.
  72. El Haber F, Froyer G. Transparent polymers embedding nanoparticles for X-rays attenuation. J Univ Chem Technol Metall 2008; 43(3): 283-90.
  73. Botelho MZ, Künzel R, Okuno E, Levenhagen RS, Basegio T, Bergmann CP. X-ray transmission through nanostructured and microstructured CuO materials. Appl Radiat Isot 2011; 69(2): 527-30.
  74. Malekzadeh R, Mehnati P, Sooteh MY, Mesbahi A. Influence of the size of nano- and microparticles and photon energy on mass attenuation coefficients of bismuth-silicon shields in diagnostic radiology. Radiol Phys Technol 2019; 12(3): 325-34.
  75. Aghaz A, Faghihi R, Mortazavi S, Haghparast A, Mehdizadeh S, Sina S. Radiation attenuation properties of shields containing micro and Nano WO3 in diagnostic X-ray energy range. Int J Radiat Res 2016; 14(2): 127-31.
  76. Abdalsalam AH, Sayyed MI, Hussein TA, Şakar E, Mhareb MHA, Şakar BC, et al. A study of gamma attenuation property of UHMWPE/Bi2O3 nanocomposites. Chemical Physics 2019; 523: 92-8.
  77. Abdalsalam AH, Şakar E, Kaky KM, Mhareb MHA, Şakar BC, Sayyed MI, et al. Investigation of gamma ray attenuation features of bismuth oxide nano powder reinforced high-density polyethylene matrix composites. Radiat Phys Chem 2020; 168: 108537.
  78. Noor Azman NZ, Siddiqui SA, Haroosh HJ, Albetran HMM, Johannessen B, Dong Y, et al. Characteristics of X-ray attenuation in electrospun bismuth oxide/polylactic acid nanofibre mats. J Synchrotron Radia 2013; 20(Pt 5): 741-8.
  79. Noor Azman NZ, Musa NFL, Nik Ab Razak NNA, Ramli R, Shahrim I, Rahman A, et al. Effect of Bi2O3 particle sizes and addition of starch into Bi2O3-PVA composites for X-ray shielding. Applied Physics A 2016; 122(9): 818.
  80. Rashidi M, Saffari M, Shirkhanloo H, Avadi MR. Evaluating X-ray absorption of nano-bismuth oxide ointment for decreasing risks associated with X-ray exposure among operating room personnel and radiology experts. J Health Saf Work 2015; 5(4): 13-22.
  81. Alavain H, Tavakoli-Anbaran H. Study on gamma shielding polymer composites reinforced with different sizes and proportions of tungsten particles using MCNP code. Prog Nucl Energy 2019; 115: 91-8.
  82. Prabhu S, Bubbly SG, Gudennavar SB. Thermal, mechanical and γ-ray shielding properties of micro- and nano-Ta2O5 loaded DGEBA epoxy resin composites. J Appl Polym Sci 2021; 138(44): 51289.
  83. Li Z, Zhou W, Zhang X, Gao Y, Guo S. High-efficiency, flexibility and lead-free X-ray shielding multilayered polymer composites: layered structure design and shielding mechanism. Sci Rep 2021; 11(1): 4384.
مجله دانشکده پزشکی اصفهان
دوره 40، شماره 691
هفته 3 آذرماه
آذر و دی 1401
صفحه 832-842

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار