Search NASA⌕ Search
Home/Archive/DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI · 22130399

Measuring pacemaker dose: A clinical perspective

Ying, Xiao·Harrison, Amy S.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Recently in our clinic, we have seen an increased number of patients presenting with pacemakers and defibrillators. Precautions are taken to develop a treatment plan that minimizes the dose to the pacemaker because of the adverse effects of radiation on the electronics. Here we analyze different dosimeters to determine which is the most accurate in measuring pacemaker or defibrillator dose while at the same time not requiring a significant investment in time to maintain an efficient workflow in the clinic. The dosimeters analyzed here were ion chambers, diodes, metal-oxide-semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFETs), and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimeters. A simple phantom was used to quantify the angular and energy dependence of each dosimeter. Next, 8 patients plans were delivered to a Rando phantom with all the dosimeters located where the pacemaker would be, and the measurements were compared with the predicted dose. A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image was obtained to determine the dosimeter response in the kilovoltage energy range. In terms of the angular and energy dependence of the dosimeters, the ion chamber and diode were the most stable. For the clinical cases, all the dosimeters match relatively well with the predicted dose, although the ideal dosimeter to use is case dependent. The dosimeters, especially the MOSFETS, tend to be less accurate for the plans, with many lateral beams. Because of their efficiency, we recommend using a MOSFET or a diode to measure the dose. If a discrepancy is observed between the measured and expected dose (especially when the pacemaker to field edge is <10 cm), we recommend analyzing the treatment plan to see whether there are many lateral beams. Follow-up with another dosimeter rather than repeating multiple times with the same type of dosimeter. All dosimeters should be placed after the CBCT has been acquired.

Explore related subjects

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRYCARDIAC PACEMAKERSCOMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHYDOSEMETERSDOSIMETRYEFFICIENCYENERGY DEPENDENCEIMAGESIONIZATION CHAMBERSLUMINESCENCEMOSFETPATIENTSPHANTOMSRADIATION DOSES

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ying, Xiao, Harrison, Amy S.. 2012-07-01. Measuring pacemaker dose: A clinical perspective. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2011.06.007

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

DOE OSTI2026

Deep Learning enabled spectral energy conversion for in situ exposure measurements

A detector-specific deep learning (DL) approach is presented for spectra-to-exposure conversion using large-format sodium iodide (NaI(Tl)) detectors deployed for in situ environmental radiation measurements in emergency response scenarios. Accurate determination of exposure from NaI spectra is challenging due to poor energy resolution, partial energy absorption, and the strong sensitivity of traditionally deployed analytical conversion methods to calibrated source geometry and pre-deployment assumptions. Here, to address these limitations, a multi-layer perceptron model was trained on a hybrid in situ /Monte Carlo dataset constructed to span a broad range of photon energies, spatial extents, and realistic deployment variability, representative of general in situ emergency response conditions. The DL model was evaluated against commonly fielded analytical approaches under matched simulation conditions, including a single-factor method, a G-function method, and a modeled pressurized ion chamber (PIC) baseline. This study was intentionally computational in scope to enable controlled, like-for-like comparisons between conversion techniques while minimizing confounding real-world variability. Comparison to the modeled PIC provides contextual benchmarking and is not intended as a field inter-comparison with deployed instruments. Across the evaluated 20 keV to 3 MeV energy range, the DL approach consistently exhibited higher accuracy and reduced variance relative to the analytical methods against a deterministically calculated exposure. This may indicate improved robustness to spectral complexity without reliance on source-, geometric-, or spectral region-specific optimization. While results do not represent real-world validation, the presented work demonstrates that deep learning may effectively learn the nonlinear detector response-to-exposure relationship for asymmetric NaI(Tl) detectors and offers a promising pathway for improving in situ exposure estimation using spectroscopic systems already integrated into initial real-time emergency response operations.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2026

ACRRF High-Bay Dose Calculations using MCNP (Part B)

ACRR radiation outputs through vertical cavities have been documented in two reports. In Part B, the maximum dose from the unshielded central cavity, FREC-II, and NRS is calculated to inform the safety basis. The maximum dose is ≈1430 mrem per 300 MJ, or ≈40,930 rem/hr for full-power operation. A verification study completes the V&V of the modeling. Supplementary studies of variance-reduction techniques, model sensitivities, and aircraft dose above the ACRRF are included.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Logistics for the 2026 International Nuclear Accident Dosimetry Intercomparison Exercise

The purpose of this exercise is to test participants’ nuclear accident dosimeters (NADs) and personnel to the requirements established by American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Health Physics Society (HPS) standard ANSI/HPS-N13.3-2013 (R2025) Dosimetry for Criticality Accidents. IER-634 is the second nuclear accident dosimetry exercise taking place at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (AFRRI) in Bethesda, MD, a Department of Defense (DOD) facility. This effort continues use of the high-dose neutron exposure test bed maintained by the DOD and represents the continued collaboration between the DOD and Department of Energy (DOE). Previous work at AFRRI included a reactor characterization (IER 484) in 2023 and a nuclear accident intercomparison exercise (IER-602) in 2024.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗