Radiometric survey on the exposure to and management of radioactive waste produced by patients on I131 treatment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X34436Keywords:
Nuclear medicine. Radioactive waste. Iodine therapyAbstract
The objective of this study is to perform a radiometric survey on the exposure of Occupationally Exposed Individuals (OEI) to radioactive waste and to evaluate the management of radioactive waste produced by patients treated with Iodine-131 (I131) in a hospital in São Luís, MA, Brazil. For this purpose, radiometric levels were measured using radiation measuring devices placed at strategic points in the hospital bed and the areas surrounding the tailings deposit. For four months, a team of professionals using equations of exposure rate, activity, and equivalent dose analyzed the waste disposal management and the exposure received by the OEI. It was concluded that the discarded waste had a level lower than 2 μCi/kg, thus complying with CNEN 6.05 standard. Patients who were administered I131 with 100 and 150 mCi activity needed to be hospitalized for only 24 hours, while those with 200 mCi activity required 36 to 48 hours of hospitalization. The exposure rate emitted by the wastes in the iodine rooms was 1.95 mR / h and in the area near the tailings deposit, the OEI received an equivalent dose of 0.01 mSv per week - values below the maximum limit allowed by CNEN 3.01/2014.
Downloads
References
ADUAN, S. A.; BRAGA, F. S.; ZANDONADE, E.; SALLES, D. C.; NOIL, A. M.; LANGE, L. C. Avaliação dos resíduos de serviços de saúde do Grupo A em hospitais de Vitória (ES), Brasil. Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, Rio de Janeiro, v. 19, n. 2, p. 413 420, 2014.
ANDRÉ, S. C. S.; VEIGA, T. B; TAKAYANAGUI, A. M. Geração de resíduos de serviços de saúde em hospitais do município de Ribeirão Preto (SP), Brasil. Engenharia Sanitária Ambiental, v.21 n.1, p.123-130, 2016.
ANVISA; Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Resolução da Diretoria Colegiada da ANVISA – RDC 306. Disponível em: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/documents/33880/2568070/res0306_07_12_2004.pdf/95eac678-d441-4033-a5ab-f0276d56aaa6, 2014.
BERERHI, C. A. R. Radiation exposure levels in relatives of patients after radioiodine therapy. SQU Journal for Scientific Reseasch, Medical Sciences, College of Medicine. Sultan Qaboos University, n. 2, p. 87-90, 2000.
BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Disponível em: https://www2.senado.leg.br/bdsf/bitstream/handle/id/518231/CF88_Livro_EC91_2016.
BUDESCHESKI, S. O; SILVA, F. L; BADELLI, J. C. Avaliação dosimétrica de indivíduos ocupacionalmente expostos (IOE) em Medicina Nuclear. Revista Tecnhoeng, v. 1, n°13, p. 92-111, 2016.
CAMPOS, Rafael Ferreira. Avaliação da contribuição da contaminação de superfícies do quarto terapêutico na medida da taxa de exposição de pacientes de radioiodoterapia. TCC (Pós-Graduação em Proteção Radiológica e Segurança de Fontes Radioativas) – Instituto de Radioproteção e Dosimetria – CNEN. Rio de Janeiro, p.33. 2015.
CHANG, J. C. M; MOREIRA, J. P. Tratamiento con yodo radiactivo en hipertiroidismo. Revista Hosp Clin Univ Chile, v. 25, p. 285 – 90, 2014.
COMISSÃO NACIONAL DE ENERGIA NUCLEAR (CNEN). Gerência de Rejeitos Radioativos de Baixo e Médio Níveis de Radiação. Norma CNEN NN 6.05, Resolução CNEN 167/14.
COMISSÃO NACIONAL DE ENERGIA NUCLEAR. Diretrizes Básicas de Radioproteção. CNEN-NN-3.01; resolução 2014.
COMISSÃO NACIONAL DE ENERGIA NUCLEAR. Requisitos de Radioproteção e Segurança para Serviço de Medicina Nuclear CNEN-NN-3.05; resolução 2013.
CONAMA – Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente. Resolução 358, 2005. Disponível em: http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/legiabre.cfm.codlegi=462.
COOPER, D. S; Doherty, G. M; HAUGEN, B. R; KLOOS, R. T; LEE, S. L; MANDEL, S. J; MAZZAFERRI, E. L; MCIVER, B. SHERMAN, S. I, TUTTLE, R. M. Management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid câncer. Thyroid. n. 16, p. 1-33, 2006.
CORONHO, V.; PETROIAANU, A.; SANTANA, E. M.; PIMENTA, L. G. Tratado de endocrinologia e cirurgia endócrina. 1° edição; Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan, 2001; p. 466-77.
DIAS GL; SARTURI F; CAMPONOGARA S; et al. Análise da taxa de geração de resíduos de serviços de saúde em um hospital universitário. Rev Fund Care Online. 2017, v. 9, n. 1, p. 92-98. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.9789/2175-5361.2017.v9i1.92-98
International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear Medicine Resources Manual; International Atomic Energy Agency: Vienna, Austria, 2006.
International Commissioin on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 94, Release of Patients after Therapy with Unsealed Radionuclides; Pergamon Press: Oxford, UK, 2004.
KRAWCZYK, E.; PIÑERO-GARCÍA, F.; FERRO-GARCÍA, M. A. Discharges of nuclear medicine radioisotopes in Spanish hospitals. Journal of environmental radioactivity, v. 116, p. 93-98, 2013.
LIRA, R. F. et. al. Verificação do uso de dosímetros individuais em serviço de medicina nuclear de Pernambuco nos anos de 2002 a 2010. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, p. 26-29, 2015.
MENDES, A. A.; VEIGA, T, B; et al. Resíduos de serviços de saúde em serviço de atendimento pré-hospitalar móvel. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem REBEN, v. 68; n. 6; p. 1122-9, 2015.
MENDONÇA, K. M. C. Avaliação dosimétrica de familiares e ambientes domiciliar de pacientes com hipertireoidismo submetidos à radioiodoterapia ambulatorial. Tese (Programa de Pós-Graduação em Tecnologias Energéticas e Nucleares do Departamento de Energia Nuclear da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco). UFPE. Recife. 2016. P.12.
OLIVEIRA et al., Modelo quantitativo de avaliação da contribuição de cada fonte radioativa na dose individual externa Hx em trabalhador de serviço de medicina nuclear. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, 2016; v. 4, n. 2, p.01-06.
PACINI F, SCHLUMBERGER, M.; DRALLE, H.; ELISEI, R. SMIT, J.W. A,; WIERSINGA, W. M.; and the European Thyroid Cancer Taskforce 2006 Consensus Statement. European consensus for the management of patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma of the follicular epithelium. Eur J Endocrinol. 154:787- 803.
RISSATO, Maria Lúcia Iodoterapia: avaliação crítica de procedimentos de precaução e manuseio dos rejeitos radioativos gerados em unidade de internação hospitalar. Dissertação mestrado UNIARA - Araraquara, 2007;129p.
SILVA R M, SANTOS H C. Gerenciamento de Rejeitos Radioativos da Iodoterapia. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences. 2015; p 5.
TOMASINA, F et al, Vigilancia de la exposición a radiaciones ionizantes em el personal universitário de la salud. Revista Cubana de Salud Pública, v. 36, n. 1, p. 119-127, 2010.
WORLD ORGANIZATION HEALTH (WHO). Safe management of wastes from health care activities. Geneva: WHO,1999.
XAVIER, AM. Gerência de rejeitos radioativos. Rio de Janeiro: CNEN, 2012. Disponívelem:<http://www.ilea.ufrgs.br/radioisotopos/Aula%2025%20Julho%20arquivo%203.pdf>
ZHANG, H; JIAO, L; CUI, S; et al. The study of external dose rate and retained body activity of patients receiving 131I therapy for differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Int.J.Environ. Res.Public Health, v. 11, 10991-11003, 2014.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
