Ladewig-Bernaldez G, Gómez-Flores G, González-Delgado A, Figueroa-Reyes F, Oropeza-Oropeza E, Collado-Arce M, Dufoo-Olvera M

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 143-147
PDF size: 149.21 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: in general, spine surgeons seek to minimize soft tissue damage by using less invasive approaches, which causes them to use intraoperative images much more frequently than other surgical specialties; therefore, they are at increased risk of radiation exposure. Objective: the aim of this work was to analyse the amount of radiation to which the spine surgeon is exposed in different scenarios. Material and methods: a prospective study with a descriptive, longitudinal non-randomized data source. We carried out this study in the period from 2015 to 2019, the radiologic protection consisted in lead apron, thyroid shield and leaded glasses, there were 10 badge dosimeters. Results: only 4 dosimeters were included in the study, the other six were excluded. During the study period one surgeon suffered thyroid cancer and other suffered of liposarcoma. In the protected group were two surgeons, in the group of aleatory exposition was one surgeon and in the unprotected group was one surgeon. In the study the dosimeter in the unprotected group received more amount of radiation in all the years, we did an inferential analysis per year related with the number of surgeries without significant correlation, we attribute this result because we didn't classified the type of surgery realized by each surgeon. Conclusion: we conclude that the spine surgeon must apply the primary methods of radiological protection and that the unprotected spine surgeon receives more amount of radiation in comparison of the protected ones.

REFERENCES

1. Singer G. Occupational radiation exposure to the surgeon. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005; 13(1): 69-76.

2. Lester JD, Hsu S, Ahmad CS, Occupational hazards facing orthopaedic surgeons. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2012; 41(3): 132-9.

3. Yu E, Khan SN. Does less invasive spine surgery result in increased radiation exposure? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472(6): 1738-48.

4. McColl N, Auvinen A, Kesminiene A, Espina C, Erdmann F, de Vries E, et al. European Code against Cancer 4th Edition: Ionising and non-ionising radiation and cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. 2015; 39 Suppl 1: S93-100.

5. Mastrangelo G, Fedeli U, Fadda E, Giovanazzi A, Scoizzato L, Saia B. Increased cancer risk among surgeons in an orthopaedic hospital. Occup Med (Lond). 2005; 55(6): 498-500.

6. Reglamento General de Seguridad Radiológica. Diario Oficial de la Federación. 1988. México.

7. Bazán PL, Muscia R, Gomez CJ, Corrales PJ, Borri AE, Medina M, et al. Incidencia de la exposición a los rayos X en cirugías de columna. Rev Asoc Argent Ortop Traumatol 2019; 84(3): 208-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.15417/issn.1852-7434.2019.84.3.884

8. Yener ER, Burc H, Saka G, Akmaz I. Can radiation exposure to the surgeon can be reduced with freehand pedicle screw fixaxtion technique in pediatric spinal deformity correction? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014; 39(6): 521-5.

9. Hadelsberg UP, Harel R. Hazards of ionizing radiation and its impact on spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2016; 92: 353-359.

10. Bronsard N, Boli T, Challali M. Comparison between percutaneous and traditional fixation of lumbar spine fractures: Intraoperative radiation exposure levels and outcomes. Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surery and Research. 2013; 99: 162-8.

11. Mulconrey DS. Fluoroscopic radiation exposure in spinal surgery: in vivo evaluation for operating room personnel. Clin Spine Surg. 2016; 29(7): E331-5.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

II