Abstract: Aim: was to analyze the risk of malignancy incidence as a result of exposure of small doses of diagnostic radiation when examining patients on computed tomography (CT). Material and methods: a retrospective study was conducted on the base of analysis of information from archival protocols for examinations of patients living in Ozersk city and examined in computed tomography department of the Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Hospital for the period 1993-2004. Study includes generalized material containing data from several population registers of the Laboratory of Radiation Epidemiology of the South Ural Institute of Biophysics. Results: study revealed the presence of a statistically insignificant excess of the risk of incidence of malignancy among patients who underwent a CT study from the beginning of the appearance of this type of study in hospitals in the Chelyabinsk region until the end of the first stage of epidemiological surveillance - December 31, 2004. Conclusion: obtained results are interesting for various categories of specialists: radiologists, radiation epidemiologists, radiobiologists and radiation hygiene specialists. Further research is needed with an extension of the retrospective observation period. References 1. Collection of legislation of the Russian Federation. Federal Law 21.11.2011 No. 323-FZ «On Principles of the Protection of Citizens' Health in the Russian Federation». Part 4, article 34 [In Russ]. https://www.rosminzdrav.ru/documents/7025 1. Narkevich BYa, Dolgushin BI. Radiation safety assurance in computed tomography and interventional radiology. REJR. 2013; 2 (3): 7–19. 2. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography – an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2277-2284. 3. Order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation No. 298 of July 31, 2000, dated January 9, 1996, No. 3-FZ (Federal Law) «On Approval of the Regulation on the Unified State System of Control and Accounting for iIndividual Exposures of Citizens» [In Russ]. http://legalacts.ru/doc/prikaz-minzdrava-rf-ot-31072000-n-298/ 4. Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 16.06.97 No. 718 «On the procedure for creating a unified state system for monitoring and recording individual doses to citizens» [In Russ]. http://legalacts.ru/doc/postanovlenie-pravitelstva-rf-ot-16061997-n-718/ 5. Koshurnikova NA, Kabirova NR, Bolotnikova MG, et al. Description of the register of persons, had lived in childhood near the Mayak Production Association. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2003; 2: 27-34 [In Russ]. 6. Koshurnikova NA, Shilnikova NS, Okatenko PV, et al. Characteristics of cohort of workers of «Mayak» PO. Medical radiology and radiation safety. 1998; 43 (6): 43–57 [In Russ]. 7. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation: UNSCEAR 2012 report to the General Assembly. Scientific Annexes. New York. United Nations; 2015. 8. Abramson, JH. WINPEPI updated: computer programs for epidemiologists, and their teaching potential. Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations. 2011; 8:1 10. Preston DL. Epicure User’s Guide. USA: 330. 11. Howe GR. Lung Cancer Mortality between 1950 and 1987 after Exposure to Fractionated Moderate-Dose-Rate Ionizing Radiation in the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study and the Comparison with Lung Cancer Mortality in the Atomic Bomb Survivors Study. Radiation Research. 1995; 142: 295-304. 12. Ivanov VK, Kashcheev VV, Menyaylo SYu, et al. Radiation risk of medical exposure. Radiation and risk. 2012; 21 (4): 7-23 [In Russ]. 13. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumors: a retrospective cohort study. The Lancet. 2012; 380. 14. Shilnikova NS, Preston DL, Ron E, et al. Cancer Mortality Risk among Workers at the Mayak Nuclear Complex. Radiation Research. 2003; 159: 787–798. 15. Lebedev NI, Osipov MV, Babintseva NA, et al. Register of patients undergoing CT scan - examinations in the department of radiation diagnostics of the Central Medical Center-71, Ozersk. REJR. 2017; 7 (2): 110-116 [In Russ]. https://doi.org/10.21569/2222-7415-2017-7-2-110-116 16. Finashov LV, Kuznetsova IS, Sokolnikov ME. Prostate cancer incidence among workers with work-related exposure of radiation at the Mayak Production Association. Radiation and Risk, 2019; 28 (4): 54–64 [In Russ]. https://doi.org/10.21870/0131-3878-2019-28-4-54-64 17. Fomin EP, Osipov MV. Pooled database of Ozyorsk population exposed to computed tomography. REJR 2019; 9 (2):234-239.
Abstract: Introduction: development of software and hardware capabilities of modern computing systems has enabled three-dimensional (3D) modeling and 3D printing technology (medical prototyping) to become available for a wide range of healthcare specialists. Commercial software used for this purpose remains unavailable to private physicians and small institutions due to the high cost. However, there are freeware applications and affordable 3D printers that can also be used to create medical prototypes. Aim: was to describe stages of creating of physical 3D models based on medical imaging data and to highlight main features of specialized software and to make an overview of main types of 3D printing used in medicine. Material and methods: article describes process of creation of medical prototype, that can be divided on three main stages: 1) acquisition of medical imaging, obtained by ‘volumetric’ scanning methods (computed tomography (CT), magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI), 3D ultrasound (3D US)); 2) virtual 3D model making (on the basis of visualisation data) by segmentation, polygonal mesh extraction and correction; 3) 3D printing of virtual model by the chosen method of additive manufacturing, with or without post-processing. Conclusion: medical prototypes with sufficient precision and physical properties are necessary for understanding of anatomical structure and surgical crew training and can be made with use of freely available software and inexpensive 3D printers.
References 1. Luo H, Meyer-Szary О, Wang Z, Sabiniewicz R, Liu Y. Three-dimensional printing in cardiology: current applications and future challenges. Cardiol. J. 2017; 24 (4): 436–444. 2. Vukicevic M, Mosadegh B, Min J K, Little S H. Cardiac 3D printing and its future directions. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging. 2017; 10 (2): 171–184. 3. Meier LM, Meineri ·M, Hiansen JQ, Horlick EM. Structural and congenital heart disease interventions: the role of three-dimensional printing. Neth Heart J. 2017; 25 (2): 65–75. 4. Witschey WR, Pouch AM, McGarvey JR, Ikeuchi K, Contijoch F, Levack MM, Yushkevick PA, Sehgal CM, Jackson BM, Gorman RC, Gorman JH. Three-dimensional ultrasound-derived physical mitral valve modeling. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2014; 98 (2): 691–694. 5. Vukicevic M, Puperi DS, Grande-Allen KJ, Little SH. 3D Printed Modeling of the Mitral Valve for Catheter-Based Structural Interventions. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2017; 45 (2): 508–519. 6. Parimi M, Buelter J, Thanugundla V, Condoor S, Parkar N, Danon S, King W. Feasibility and Validity of Printing 3D Heart Models from Rotational Angiography. Pediatr. Cardiol. 2018; 39 (4): 653–658. 7. Abudayyeh I, Gordon B, Ansari MM, Jutzy K, Stoletniy L, Hilliard A. A practical guide to cardiovascular 3D printing in clinical practice: Overview and examples. J. Interv. Cardiol. 2018; 31 (3): 375–383. 8. Ripley B, Levin D, Kelil T, Hermsen JL, Kim S, Maki JH, Wilson GJ. 3D printing from MRI Data: Harnessing strengths and minimizing weaknesses. J.of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2016; 45 (3): 1–11. 9. Wang J, Coles-Black J, Matalanis G, Chuen J. Innovations in cardiac surgery: techniques and applications of 3D printing. J. 3D Print. Med. 2018; 2 (4): 179–186. 10. Nagibovich OA, Svistov DV, Peleshok SA, Korovin AE, Gorodkov EV. Appliance of 3D printing technology in medicine. Klin. patofiz. 2017; 23 (3): 14–22 [In Russ]. 11. Bagaturiya GO. Prospects for the use of 3D printing in planning of surgical operations. Med.: teorija i praktika. 2016; 1 (1): 26–35 [In Russ]. 12. Kim GB, Lee S, Kim H, Yang DH, Kim Y-H, Kyung YS, Kim C-S, Choi SH, Kim BJ, Ha H, Kwon SU, Kim N. Three-Dimensional Printing: Basic Principles and Applications in Medicine and Radiology. Korean J. of Radiol. 2016; 17): 182. 13. Shi D, Liu K, Zhang X, Liao H, Chen X. Applications of three-dimensional printing technology in the cardiovascular field. Inter. and Emergency Med. 2015; 10: 769–780. 14. Byrne N, Forte MV, Tandon A, Tandon A, Valverde I, Hussain T. A systematic review of image segmentation methodology, used in the additive manufacture of patient specific 3D printed models of the cardiovascular system. JRSM Cardiovasc. Disease. 2016; 5 (0): 1–9. 15. Valverde I. Three-dimensional printed cardiac models: applications in the field of medical education, cardiovascular surgery, and structural heart interventions. Revista Espaсola de Cardiologнa (English Edition). 2017; 70 (4): 282–291. 16. Karyakin NN, Shubnyakov II, Denisov AO, Kachko A V, Alyev RV, Gorbatov RO. Regulatory concerns about medical device manufacturing using 3D printing: current state of the issue. Travmatol. i ortop. Ross. 2018; 24 (4): 129–136 [In Russ].
Abstract Aim: was to determine characteristic signs of instability and threatening rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms, detected by computed tomography (CT) according to analysis of modern literature. Materials: international clinical recommendations and studies of 36 domestic and foreign authors on the diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) using computed tomography (CT) were studied. We studied publications that describe the pathogenetic mechanisms of AAA rupture, structural changes in the aortic wall and surrounding tissues, which can be regarded as signs of the formation of aneurysm rupture. Conclusion: according to literature, specific CT signs of aortic wall instability and data on the high diagnostic value of some of them are presented. Methodological aspects of the analysis of CT data are described for large aneurysms and complex configurations. References 1. Pokrovskij A.V. (red.). Clinical Angiology: practical guide in in 2 vol. M.: Medicina. 2004. [In Russ] 2. Davis C.A. Computed tomography for the diagnosis and management of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Surg. Clin. North Am. 2011; 91(1): 185-193. 3. National guidelines for the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms. Angiologiya i serdechno-sosudistaya hirurgiya. 2013; 19 (2, Pril.): 72. [In Russ] 4. Prokop M., Galanski M. (red.). Spiral and multilayer computed tomography: in 2 vol. 3-e izd. M.: MEDpress- info. 2011. [ [In Russ] 5. Pleumeekers H.J., Hoes A.W., van der Does E., et al. Aneurysms of the abdominal aorta in older Aneurysms of the abdominal aorta in older adults. The Rotterdam Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 142 (12): 1291-1299. 6. Singh K., Bonaa K.H., Jacobsen B.K., et al. Prevalence and risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysms in a ence and risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysms in a population-based study: the Tromsu Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2001; 154 (3): 236-244. 7. Ahmed M.Z., Ling L., Ettles D.F. Common and uncommon CT findings in rupture and impending rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Clin. Radiol. 2013; 68(9): 962-971. 8. Genovese E.A., Fonio P, Floridi C. et al. Abdominal vascular emergencies: US and CT assessment. Crit. Ultrasound J. 2013; 5(Suppl 1): S10. 9. Wadgaonkar A.D., Black J.H. 3rd, Weihe E.K. et al. Abdominal aortic aneurysms revisited: MDCT with multi-planar meconstructions for identifying indicators of instability in the pre- and postoperative patient. Radiographics. 2015; 35 (1): 254-268. 10. Vorp D. Biomechanics of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J. Biomech. 2007; 40(9): 1887-1902. 11. Fillinger M.F., Racusin J., Baker R.K. et al. Anatomic characteristics of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm on conventional CT scans: Implications for rupture risk. J. Vasc. Surg. 2004; 39 (6): 1243-1252. 12. Hinchliffe R.J, Alric P, Rose D. et al. Comparison of morphologic features of intact and ruptured aneurysms of infrarenal abdominal aorta. J. Vasc. Surg. 2003; 38(1): 88-92. 13. Johnson P.T., Fishman E.K. IV contrast selection for MDCT: current thoughts and practice. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006; 186 (2): 406-415. 14. Brewster D.C., Cronenwett J.L., Hallett J.W. Jr et al. Guidelines for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Report of a subcommittee of the Joint Council of the American Association for Vascular Surgery and Society for Vascular Surgery. J. Vasc. Surg. 2003; 37(5): 1106-1117. 15. Vu K.N., Kaitoukov Y, Morin-Roy F. et al. Rupture signs on computed tomography, treatment, and outcome of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Insights Imaging. 2014; 5 (3): 281-293. 16. Halliday K.E., al-Kutoubi A. Draped aorta: CT sign of contained leak of aortic aneurysms. Radiology. 1996; 199(1): 41-43. 17. Yuksekkaya R., Koner A.E., Celikyay F. et al. Multidetector computed tomography angiography findings of chronic-contained thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm rupture with severe thoracal vertebral body erosion. Case Rep. Radiol. 2013; 2013: 596517. 18. Schwartz S.A., Taljanovic M.S., Smyth S. et al. CT findings of rupture, impending rupture, and contained rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2007; 188 (1): W57-62. 19. Mehard W.B., Heiken J.P., Sicard G.A. High-attenuating crescent in abdominal aortic aneurysm wall at CT: a sign of acute or impending rupture. Radiology. 1994; 192(2): 359-362. 20. Radiological diagnosis of diseases of the heart and blood vessels: a national guide. (edited by L.S. Kokova). M.: GEHOTAR-Media. 2011; 256. [ [In Russ] 21. Erbel R., Aboyans V., Boileau C. et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: Document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur. Heart J. 2014; 35 (41): 28732926. 22. Vorp D.A., Raghavan M.L., Webster M.W. Mechanical wall stress in abdominal aortic aneurysm: Influence of diameter and asymmetry. J. Vasc. Surg. 1998; 27(4): 632639. 23. Fillinger M.F., Raghavan M.L., Marra S.P. et al. In vivo analysis of mechanical wall stress and abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture risk. J. Vasc. Surg. 2002; 36(3): 589-597. 24. Kontopodis N., Metaxa E., Papaharilaou Y et al. Advancements in identifying biomechanical determinants for abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture. Vascular. 2015; 23(1): 65-77. 25. Doyle B.J., Callanan A., Burke P.E. et al. Vessel asymmetry as an additional diagnostic tool in the assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J. Vasc. Surg. 2009; 49(2): 443-454. 26. Giannoglou G., Giannakoulas G., Soulis J. et al. Predicting the risk of rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms by utilizing various geometrical parameters: Revisiting the diameter criterion. Angiology. 2006; 57(4): 487-494. 27. Georgakarakos E., Ioannou C.V., Kamarianakis Y et al. The role of geometric parameters in the prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysm wall stress. Eur. J. Vasc. Surg. 2010; 39(1): 42-48. 28. Moxon J.V., Adam Parr, Emeto T.I. et al. Diagnosis and monitoring of abdominal aortic aneurysm: Current status and future prospects. J. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 2010; 35: 512-548. 29. Polzer S., Gasser T.C., Swedenborg J., 30. Hunter G.C., 31. Rakita D., Newatia A., Hines J.J. et al. Spectrum of CT findings in rupture and impending rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms. RadioGraphics. 2007; 27(2): 497-507. 32. Oldenburg W.A., Almerey T. Erosion of lumbar vertebral bodies from a chronic contained rupture of an abdominal aortic pseudoaneurysm. J. Vasc. Surg. Cas. Innovat. Techn. 2016; 2(4): 197-199. 33. Endovascular aneurysm repair vs. open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1): randomized control trial. Lancet. 2005; 365: 2179-2186. 34. Zarins C.K., White R.A., Fogarty T.J. Aneurysm rupture after endovascular repair using the aneurx stent graft. J. Vasc. Surg. 2000; 31(5): 960-970. 35. Zarins C.K., White R.A., Hodgson K.J. et al. Endoleak as a predictor of outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair: AneuRx multicenter clinical trial. J. Vasc. Surg. 2000; 32(1): 90-107. 36. Bernhard V.M., Mitchell R.S., Matsumura J.S. et al. Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular repair. J. Vasc. Surg. 2002; 35(6): 1155-1162.
