Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
      • JNMT Supplement
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • Continuing Education
    • JNMT Podcast
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Institutional and Non-member
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNMT
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA Requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNMT
    • JNM
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
  • SNMMI
    • JNMT
    • JNM
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • Continuing Education
    • JNMT Podcast
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Institutional and Non-member
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNMT
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA Requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Watch or Listen to JNMT Podcast
  • Visit SNMMI on Facebook
  • Join SNMMI on LinkedIn
  • Follow SNMMI on Twitter
  • Subscribe to JNMT RSS feeds
OtherCONTINUING EDUCATION

Review of Common Occupational Hazards and Safety Concerns for Nuclear Medicine Technologists

Norman E. Bolus
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology March 2008, 36 (1) 11-17; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.107.043869
Norman E. Bolus
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Tables

    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    HVLs for many isotopes commonly used in nuclear medicine

    RadioisotopeMain energy (keV)HVL of Pb (cm)
    99mTc140∼0.02
    131I364∼0.30
    133Xe81∼0.03
    111In245∼0.10
    137Cs662∼0.65
    201Tl70∼0.03
    125I35.5∼0.01
    • Data were obtained from online sources (4,5).

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Potential Health Effects (Other than Cancer) of Prenatal Radiation Exposure

    Health effects at following time after conception
    Acute radiation dose* to embryo or fetusBlastogenesis (up to 2 wk)Fetogenesis
    Organogenesis (2–7 wk)(8–15 wk)(16–25 wk)(26–38 wk)
    <0.05 Gy (5 rad)†Noncancer health effects NOT detectableNoncancer health effects NOT detectableNoncancer health effects NOT detectableNoncancer health effects NOT detectableNoncancer health effects NOT detectable
    0.05–0.50 Gy (5–50 rad)Incidence of failure to implant may increase slightly, but surviving embryos will probably have no significant (noncancer) health effectsIncidence of major malformations may increase slightlyGrowth retardation possibleNoncancer health effects unlikelyNoncancer health effects unlikely
    Growth retardation possibleReduction in IQ possible (up to 15 points, depending on dose)
    Incidence of severe mental retardation of up to 20%, depending on dose
    >0.50 Gy (50 rad)‡Incidence of failure to implant will likely be large,§ depending on dose, but surviving embryos will probably have no significant (noncancer) health effectsIncidence of miscarriage may increase, depending on doseIncidence of miscarriage probably will increase, depending on doseIncidence of miscarriage may increase, depending on doseIncidence of miscarriage and neonatal death will probably increase, depending on dose‖
    Substantial risk of major malformations, such as neurologic and motor deficienciesGrowth retardation likelyGrowth retardation possible, depending on dose
    Growth retardation likelyReduction in IQ possible (>15 points, depending on dose)Reduction in IQ possible, depending on dose
    Incidence of severe mental retardation of >20%, depending on doseSevere mental retardation possible, depending on dose
    Incidence of major malformations will probably increaseIncidence of major malformations may increase
    • ↵* Acute dose = dose delivered in short time (usually minutes). Fractionated or chronic doses = doses delivered over time. For fractionated or chronic doses, health effects on fetus may differ from what is depicted here.

    • ↵† Both grays (Gy) and rads are units of absorbed dose and reflect amount of energy deposited into mass of tissue (1 Gy = 100 rad). In this document, absorbed dose is that dose received by entire fetus (whole-body fetal dose). Referenced absorbed doses in this document are assumed to be from β-radiation, γ-radiation, or x-ray radiation. Neutron or proton radiation produces many of health effects described here at lower absorbed doses.

    • ↵‡ Expectant mother may experience acute radiation syndrome at this level, depending on her whole-body dose.

    • ↵§ Fetal dose of 1 Gy (100 rad) will likely kill 50% of embryos. Dose necessary to kill 100% of human embryos or fetuses before 18 wk of gestation is about 5 Gy (500 rad).

    • ↵‖ For adults, dose necessary to kill 50% of exposed population in 60 days is about 3–5 Gy (300–500 rad), and dose necessary to kill 100% of exposed population is about 10 Gy (1,000 rad).

    • Gestational age and radiation dose are important determinants of potential noncancer health effects. Following points are of particular note.

      • Before about 2 wk of gestation (i.e., time after conception), health effect of concern from exposure to greater than 0.1 Gy (10 rad) is death of embryo. If embryo survives, however, radiation-induced noncancer health effects are unlikely, no matter what radiation dose was. Because embryo is made up of only a few cells, damage to one cell, the progenitor of many other cells, can cause death of embryo, and blastocyst will fail to implant in uterus. Embryos that survive, however, will exhibit few congenital abnormalities.

      • In all stages of gestation, radiation-induced noncancer health effects are not detectable for fetal doses below about 0.05 Gy (5 rad). Most researchers agree that dose of less than 0.05 Gy (5 rad) represents no measurable noncancer risk to embryo or fetus at any stage of gestation. Research on rodents suggests that small risk may exist for malformations as well as effects on central nervous system in range of 0.05–0.10 Gy (5–10 rad) for some stages of gestation. However, practical threshold for congenital effects in human embryo or fetus is most likely 0.10–0.20 Gy (10–20 rad).

      • From about 16 wk of gestation to birth, radiation-induced noncancer health effects are unlikely below about 0.50 Gy (50 rad). Although some researchers have suggested small possibility of impaired brain function above 0.10 Gy (10 rad) at 16–25 wk of gestation, most researchers agree that after about 16 wk of gestation, threshold for congenital effects in human embryo or fetus is approximately 0.50–0.70 Gy (50–70 rad).

    • This table is intended only as a guide. Indicated doses and times after conception are approximations.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology: 36 (1)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
Vol. 36, Issue 1
March 2008
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Review of Common Occupational Hazards and Safety Concerns for Nuclear Medicine Technologists
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology web site.
Citation Tools
Review of Common Occupational Hazards and Safety Concerns for Nuclear Medicine Technologists
Norman E. Bolus
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology Mar 2008, 36 (1) 11-17; DOI: 10.2967/jnmt.107.043869

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Review of Common Occupational Hazards and Safety Concerns for Nuclear Medicine Technologists
Norman E. Bolus
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology Mar 2008, 36 (1) 11-17; DOI: 10.2967/jnmt.107.043869
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • RADIATION SAFETY ISSUES
    • CONCLUSION
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Illuminating the Hidden: Standardizing Cardiac MIBG Imaging for Sympathetic Dysfunction
  • PET/CT Case Series: Unmasking the Mystery of Cardiac Sarcoidosis
  • Delivery Methods of Radiopharmaceuticals: Exploring Global Strategies to Minimize Occupational Radiation Exposure
Show more Continuing Education

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire