Evaluation of Effective Dose in Dental Radiography

치과 방사선 검사에서 유효선량 평가

  • Han, Su-Chul (Department of Radiologic Science, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Lee, Bo-Ram (Department of Radiologic Science, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Shin, Gwi-Soon (Department of Radiologic Technology, SongHo Health College) ;
  • Choi, Jong-Hak (Department of Radiologic Science, College of Health Science, Korea University) ;
  • Park, Hyok (Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Park, Chang-Seo (Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Chang, Kye-Yong (Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Bo-Ram (Dental Hospital, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, You-Hyun (Department of Radiologic Science, College of Health Science, Korea University)
  • 한수철 (고려대학교 보건과학대학 방사선학과) ;
  • 이보람 (고려대학교 보건과학대학 방사선학과) ;
  • 신귀순 (송호대학 방사선과) ;
  • 최종학 (고려대학교 보건과학대학 방사선학과) ;
  • 박혁 (연세대학교 치과대학병원) ;
  • 박창서 (연세대학교 치과대학병원) ;
  • 장계용 (연세대학교 치과대학병원) ;
  • 김보람 (연세대학교 치과대학병원) ;
  • 김유현 (고려대학교 보건과학대학 방사선학과)
  • Received : 2011.01.31
  • Accepted : 2011.03.07
  • Published : 2011.03.31

Abstract

Along with the developments of science technology, up-to-date medical radiation equipments are introduced. Those equipments has brought many progresses in diagnosing patients not only in the quantitative aspects but in the qualitative ones. Especially, in the case of dental radiography, patients can be exposed more than CT, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). In this study, we used human phantom and TLD-100H to measure the organ dose in each dental radiography and computed the effective dose according to ICRP (International Committee for Radioactivity Prevention) 60, 103. We measured the effective dose to be 5.1 and $29.5{\mu}Sv$ in the panoramic radiography and 11.2 and $14.4{\mu}Sv$ in the cephalometric radiography respectively. We also executed the CBCT and CT test on the maxillaries and the mandibles and found the amounts of effective dose were 53.7, 209.6, 129, and $391.5{\mu}Sv$ respectively in the CBCT and $93.3{\mu}$, 139.5, 282.7 and $489.7{\mu}Sv$ in the CT test. Consequently, it was shown that the effective dose in the CBCT test was lower than one in the CT test, but was higher in both panoramic and cephalometric radiography.

과학 기술의 발달로 인해 의료 방사선 장비 또한 첨단화 되고 있으며 정확한 진단과 치료를 할 수 있게되어 의료의 질적 향상은 물론 양적인 면에서도 그 사용이 날로 증가하고 있는 추세이다. 특히 환자 피폭선량에 대부분을 차지하는 CT(Computed Tomography) 촬영의 건수는 크게 증가하고 있다. 치과 방사선 검사의 경우 정확한 병변 진단을 위한 CT 및 CBCT(Cone Beam Computed Tomography) 의 도입으로 과거에 비해 환자는 많은 선량을 받게 되었다. 본 연구에서는 인체 팬텀과 TLD-100H를 이용하여 치과 방사선 검사별 조직의 흡수선량을 측정하고 ICRP 60, 103에 따라 유효선량을 계산하였다. ICRP 60, 103에 따른 유효선량 값은 파노라마 검사의 경우 $5.1{\mu}Sv$, $29.5{\mu}Sv$, 세팔로 검사의 경우 $11.2{\mu}Sv$, $14.4{\mu}Sv$, 이며 CBCT는 상악골의 경우 $53.7{\mu}Sv$, $209.6{\mu}Sv$, 하악골은 $129{\mu}Sv$, $391.5{\mu}Sv$ 그리고 CT에서는 상악골의 경우 $93.3{\mu}Sv$, $139.5{\mu}Sv$이며 하악골은 $282.7{\mu}Sv$, $489.7{\mu}Sv$로 평가 되었다. CBCT 검사의 경우 유효선량은 CT 검사에 비해서는 적지만 파노라마 검사 및 세팔로 검사에 비해서는 높게 평가되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Health insurance review & assessment service, state of medical equipment according to classification (2003-2010)
  2. Rebecca Smith-Bindman, MD; Jafi Lipson, MD; Ralph Marcus, BA; Kwang-Pyo Kim, PhD; Mahadevappa Mahesh, MS, PhD; Robert Gould, ScD; Amy Berrington de González, DPhil; Diana L.Miglioretti, PhD: Radiation Dose Associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated life time Attributable risk of cancer Arch Intern Med. 169(22): 2078-2086, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.427
  3. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources and effect of ionizing radiation. Report Vol. 1 UNSCEAR publications (2000)
  4. International Comission on Radiological Protection. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60. (Oxford: Pergamon Press) (1991)
  5. International Commission on Radiological Protection. The 2007 Recommendations of the ICRP, ICRP Publication 103. Elsevier, 2008
  6. J.A. Roberts, N.A. Drage, J. Davies and D.W. Thomas: Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry, Br J Radiol, 82(1), 35-40, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/31419627
  7. F. Gijbels, R. Jacobs, R. Bogaerts, D. Debaveye, S. Verlinden and G. Sanderink: Dosimetry of digital panoramic imaging. Part I. Patient exposure, Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 34(3), 145-149, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/28107460
  8. John B Ludlow, DDS, MS, Laura E, Davies-Ludlow, Bs and Stuart C. white, DDS, PhD: Patient risk related to common dental radiographic examination JADA, 139(9), 1237-1243, 2008
  9. Heiko visser, Tina Rodig and Klaus-Peter Hermann: Dose reduction by direct-digital cephalometric radiography: The angle orthodontist, 71(3), 159-163, 2001
  10. E. Hirsch, U. Wolf, Heinicke and M.A.G. Silva: Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view, Dentomaxillofac Radiol, 37(5), 268-273, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/23424132
  11. J.B. Ludlow, M. Ivanovic and C. Hill: Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64 slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology, Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 106(1), 106-114, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.018
  12. M Loubele, R. Bogaerts, E.V. Dijck, R. Pauwels, S. Vanheusden and P. Suetens et al.: Comparison between effective radiation dose of CBCT and MSCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial applications, Eur J Radiol, 71(3), 461-468, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.06.002
  13. Lee JN, Han WJ, Kim EK: Absorbed and effective dose from newly developed cone beam computed tomography in Korea, korean academy of oral and maxillofacial radi-ology, 37(2), 93-102, 2007
  14. Kostas Tsiklakis, Catherine Dontaa, Sophia Gavalaa, Kety Karayiannia, Vasiliki: Dose reduction maxillofacial imaging using low dose Cone Beam CT Euopean Journal of Radiology, 56(3), 413-417, 2005
  15. C.P. Shortt, N.F. Fanning, L. Malone: Thyroid Dose During Neurointerventional Procedures: Dose Lead Shielding Reduce the Dose? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 30(5), 922-927, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9093-7