HPS masthead
What's New?
. Fukushima Decontamination Report
. CRCPD & CDC Grants for Volunteer Corps
. America's Nuclear Future
. February Newsletter
. Boice Nominated President of NCRP
. February Journal
. February ORS
. Schauer Given the Butterfly Award from Image Gently
. Kase President's Report to IRPA
. IRPA13 Accepting Posters
Upcoming Events
. HPS Midyear - Issues in Waste Management
5-8 February 2012
Dallas, Texas
. NRC Regulatory Information Conference
NRC Regulatory Information Conference
13-15 March 2012
Rockville, Maryland
. NCRP Annual Meeting
12-13 March 2012
Washington, DC
. James E. Turner Memorial Symposium
Call for Abstracts
18-19 April 2012
Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Pollard Auditorium, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
. IRPA13
13-18 May 2012
Glasgow, Scotland
. Canadian Radiation Protection Association (CRPA) Annual Meeting
27-30 May 2012
Halifax, Nova Scotia
. ACS Undergrad Summer Schools
10 June- 20 July 2012
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meeting Webcasts
February 2012
Bethesda, Maryland
09 February 2012

Answer to Question #1520 Submitted to "Ask the Experts"

Category: Medical and Dental Patient Issues — Diagnostic X Ray and CT

The following question was answered by an expert in the appropriate field:

Q
Are conventional x rays safe in imaging the eye? I know the eye is radiosensitive to certain energies of radiation, but at what energies is this dominant? I was recommended a few weeks ago for an x-ray exam to my eye by an eye surgeon. As a radiotherapy student I was not too comfortable with this and asked if there wasn't another way to gain information they wanted. The surgeon replied that an angiogram without the injection of the iodine dye would have been sufficient but as they had injected the dye previously he wanted an x-ray exam instead. In the end the radiographer in consultation with the radiologist denied the x ray. However, I would like to know why and is the use of x rays in imaging the eye a common form?
A
The radiation dose that leads to the production of cataracts in humans is in excess of 1 gray (100 rad). It is highly unlikely that the procedure performed on you resulted in a dose to the eye that was anywhere near this level. Without knowing any more than what you have stated, my guess would be that the radiologist rejected the x ray of the eye because it did not have the capability of providing the information required by the eye surgeon rather than concern over radiation dose and any possibility of producing a cataract. Kenneth L. Miller, CHP, CMHP Penn State Hershey Medical Center (Editor's note: Grays and rads are units used to quantify exposures from ionizing radiation.)
Answer posted on 28 February 2002. The information and material posted on this website is intended as general reference information only. Specific facts and circumstances may alter the concepts and applications of materials and information described herein. The information provided is not a substitute for professional advice and should not be relied upon in the absence of such professional advice specific to whatever facts and circumstances are presented in any given situation. Answers are correct at the time they are posted on the Website. Be advised that over time, some requirements could change, new data could be made available, or Internet links could change. For answers that have been posted for several months or longer, please check the current status of the posted information prior to using the responses for specific applications.
image
image
Home Affiliates Ask the Experts Radiation Terms Employment Meetings