SCIENTIFIC AND INFORMATION-ANALYTICAL MAGAZINE

ISSN 1024-6177 (Print), ISSN 2618-9615 (Online)

JOURNAL DESCRIPTION

The Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety journal ISSN 1024-6177 was founded in January 1956 (before December 30, 1993 it was entitled Medical Radiology, ISSN 0025-8334). In 2018, the journal received Online ISSN: 2618-9615 and was registered as an electronic online publication in Roskomnadzor on March 29, 2018. It publishes original research articles which cover questions of radiobiology, radiation medicine, radiation safety, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine and scientific reviews. In general the journal has more than 30 headings and it is of interest for specialists working in thefields of medicine¸ radiation biology, epidemiology, medical physics and technology. Since July 01, 2008 the journal has been published by State Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency. The founder from 1956 to the present time is the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, and from 2008 to the present time is the Federal Medical Biological Agency.

Members of the editorial board are scientists specializing in the field of radiation biology and medicine, radiation protection, radiation epidemiology, radiation oncology, radiation diagnostics and therapy, nuclear medicine and medical physics. The editorial board consists of academicians (members of the Russian Academy of Science (RAS)), the full member of Academy of Medical Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, corresponding members of the RAS, Doctors of Medicine, professor, candidates and doctors of biological, physical mathematics and engineering sciences. The editorial board is constantly replenished by experts who work in the CIS and foreign countries.

Six issues of the journal are published per year, the volume is 13.5 conventional printed sheets, 88 printer’s sheets, 1.000 copies. The journal has an identical full-text electronic version, which, simultaneously with the printed version and color drawings, is posted on the sites of the Scientific Electronic Library (SEL) and the journal's website. The journal is distributed through the Rospechat Agency under the contract № 7407 of June 16, 2006, through individual buyers and commercial structures. The publication of articles is free.

The journal is included in the List of Russian Reviewed Scientific Journals of the Higher Attestation Commission. Since 2008 the journal has been available on the Internet and indexed in the RISC database which is placed on Web of Science. Since February 2nd, 2018, the journal "Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety" has been indexed in the SCOPUS abstract and citation database.

Brief electronic versions of the Journal have been publicly available since 2005 on the website of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal: http://www.medradiol.ru. Since 2011, all issues of the journal as a whole are publicly available, and since 2016 - full-text versions of scientific articles. Since 2005, subscribers can purchase full versions of other articles of any issue only through the National Electronic Library. The editor of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal in accordance with the National Electronic Library agreement has been providing the Library with all its production since 2005 until now.

The main working language of the journal is Russian, an additional language is English, which is used to write titles of articles, information about authors, annotations, key words, a list of literature.

Since 2017 the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety has switched to digital identification of publications, assigning to each article the identifier of the digital object (DOI), which greatly accelerated the search for the location of the article on the Internet. In future it is planned to publish the English-language version of the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety for its development. In order to obtain information about the publication activity of the journal in March 2015, a counter of readers' references to the materials posted on the site from 2005 to the present which is placed on the journal's website. During 2015 - 2016 years on average there were no more than 100-170 handlings per day. Publication of a number of articles, as well as electronic versions of profile monographs and collections in the public domain, dramatically increased the number of handlings to the journal's website to 500 - 800 per day, and the total number of visits to the site at the end of 2017 was more than 230.000.

The two-year impact factor of RISC, according to data for 2017, was 0.439, taking into account citation from all sources - 0.570, and the five-year impact factor of RISC - 0.352.

Issues journals

Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 40-49

RADIATION DIAGNOSTICS

DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83b8dbe7e4e8.68739970

Differential Radiodiagnosis of Pseudogynecomastia, Gynecomastia and Breast Cancer in Men

N.S. Vorotyntseva1, I.P. Moshurov2, M.S. Ganzya3

1. Kursk State Medical University. Kursk, Russia; 2 .Voronezh State Medical University. Voronezh. Russia; 3 .Voronezh Regional Oncology Hospital. Voronezh, Russia, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

N.S. Vorotyntseva - Dr. Sci. Med., Prof., Head of Department; I.P. Moshurov - Dr. Sci. Med., Head of Department, Chief Medical Officer; M.S. Ganzya - Radiologist

Abstract

Background: With the growth in the equipment clinics with modern diagnostic equipment is increasing the detectability of male breast pathology. In this connection there is a need to determine X-ray characteristics of some forms of the male breast pathology especially breast cancer, because in Russia it stills a problem of detecting male breast cancer at early stages.

Purpose: To determine the diagnostic capabilities of chest CT to detect various pathologies of the male breast and to identify the statistically significant radiological symptoms for the differential diagnosis of pseudogynecomastia, gynecomastia and breast cancer.

Material and methods: 150 chest CT of men who were screened and treated for the various diseases in the Voronezh Regional Clinical Diagnostic Center and Kursk Regional Clinical Hospital in 2013-2015. X-ray examinations (13 chest CT, 4 PET-CT and 16 mammography) of 31 male patients with breast cancer who were surgically treated at the Voronezh Regional Oncology Hospital in 2010-2016 are presented.

Results: The obtained data on the prevalence of pseudogynecomastia and gynecomastia in men who have no presenting complaints about changes in breast. Determined the forms of gynecomastia in this group of patients. Identified radiographic signs that allow a differential diagnosis between gynecomastia and breast cancer.

Conclusions: 1. Gynecomastia is a common pathology of the male breast diagnosed by chest CT, and was diagnosed in 68.7 % of patients, who have no presenting complaints about changes in breast. In 96.1 % of cases, gynecomastia had a dendritic form. Diffuse glandular and nodular were rare forms of the disease and were respectively 2.9 % and 1 % of all cases of this disease.

  1. Statistically significant signs of malignant character of breast masses in men were: a) the connection of the tumor with skin, areola or nipple in the form of «track» to them, thickening of the skin, «pulling» of the skin or nipple to neoplasm or their immediate invasion by tumor; b) tumor invasion into the pectoralis major muscle; c) presence of microcalcifications in neoplasm; d) presence of pathologically altered axillary lymph nodes. The determination of these radiological symptoms require immediate consultation of an oncologist.
  2. Statistically significant signs of the benign character of breast masses in men were: a) bilateral lesion and the symmetry of the changes in the breasts; b) adipose tissue inclusions in breast masses. When detection gynecomastia it needs the consultation of urologist, endocrinologist, oncologist.
  3. Awareness of physicians and radiologists on the possibility of developing breast cancer in men and the knowledge of the symptoms of this disease is crucial to detect male breast cancer at early stages and, as a consequence, more successful treatment and a favorable prognosis.

Key words: gynecomastia, male breast cancer, pseudogynecomastia, differential diagnostic, chest CT, men

REFERENCES

  1. Moshurov IP, Vorotyntseva NS, Ganzya MS. The modern views of the diagnosis of male breast cancer. Bulletin of experimental and clinical surgery. 2016;9(4):289-95. DOI: 10.18499/2070-478X-2016-9-4-289-295. Russian.
  2. Tyshchenko EV, Pak DD, Rasskazova EA. Breast cancer in men. Onkologiya. P.A. Herzen Journal of Oncology. 2014;(1):19-23. Russian.
  3. Akimova VB, Akimov DV. Comparative analysis of ultrasound and X-ray mammography in men with breast pathology. Tumors of Female Reproductive System. 2015;(3):35-42. DOI: 10.17650/1994-4098-2015-1-35-42. Russian.
  4. Letyagin VP. Breast cancer in men. Journal of N. N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center RAMS. 2000;11(4):58-62. Russian.
  5. Semiglazov VF, Semiglazov VV, Dashyan GA, Paltuev RM, Migmanova NS, Shchedrin DE, et al. Breast cancer in men. Pharmateka. 2010;(6):40-5. Russian.
  6. Lapid O, Jolink F, Maijer SL. Pathological findings in gynecomastia: analysis of 5113 breasts. Annals of Plastic Surgery. 2015;74(2):163-6. DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182920aed.
  7. Glassman LM. Pathology of the Male Breast. [Cited 2009 March 15]. Available from: http://www.radiologyassistant.nl/en/p49a3cce262026#i49b808ac17d53.
  8. Akimov DV. Ultrasound in the complex diagnosis and assessment of treatment in patients with gynecomastia. Diss. PhD. Moscow; 2014. Russian.
  9. Cuhaci N, Polat SB, Evranos B, Ersoy R, Cakir B. Gynecomastia: Clinical evaluation and management. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2014;18(2):150-8. DOI: 10.4103/2230-8210.129104.
  10. Beltsevich DG, Vanushko VE, Kuznetsov NS, Kats LE. Gynecomastia. Endocrine Surgery. 2012;(1):18-23. Russian.
  11. Korzhenkova GP. Complex X-ray and sonographic diagnosis of breast diseases: a practical guide. Moscow: STROM; Kochergina NV, editor; 2004. Russian.
  12. Yashina YuN, Rozhivanov RW, Kurbatov DG. Modern view about the epidemiology, etiology and pathogenesis of gynecomastia. Andrology and Genital Surgery. 2014;(3):8-15. Russian.
  13. Novitskaya TA, Chuprov IN, Topuzov EE, Aristov RL, Kasyanova MN. Gynecomastia: clinical, morphological and molecular-biological characteristics. Med. Almanac. 2012;4(23):39-41. Russian.
  14. Andersen JA, Gram JB. Male breast at autopsy. Acta Pathologica, Microbiologica, Et Immunologica Scandinavica. Section A. 1982;3(90):191-7.
  15. Manusharova RA, Cherkezova EI. Gynecomastia (pathophysiology, clinical examination, diagnosis, treatment). Medical Council. 2008;(7-8):48-52. Russian.
  16. Bowman JD, Kim H, Bustamante JJ. Drug-Induced Gynecomastia. Pharmacotherapy. 2012;32:1123-40. DOI: 10.1002/phar.1138.
  17. Swerdloff RS. Gynecomastia: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment. [cited 2015 Aug 3]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279105.
  18. Anderson WF, Jatoi I, Tse J, Rosenberg PS. Male breast cancer: a population-based comparison with female breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:232-9. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.8162.
  19. Cutuli B, Le-Nir CC, Serin D, Kirova Y, Gaci Z, Lemanski C. Male breast cancer: Evolution of treatment and prognostic factors-Analysis of 489 cases. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2010;73(3):246-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.
  20. Giordano SH, Cohen DS, Buzdar AU, Perkins G, Hortobagyi GN. Breast carcinoma in men: a population-based study. Cancer. 2004;101(1):51-7. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20312.
  21. Fentiman IS, Fourquet A, Hortobagyi GN. Male breast cancer. Lancet. 2006;367(9510):595-604. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68226-3.
  22. Giordano SH, Buzdar AU, Hortobagyi GN. Breast cancer in men. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(8):678-87.
  23. Ternovoy SК, Abduraimov АB. Radiological mammology. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2007. 128 p. Russian.
  24. Yamane H, Ochi N, Honda Y, Takigawa N. Gynecomastia as a Paraneoplastic Symptom of Choriocarcinoma. Intern Med. 2016;55(18):2739-40. DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.55.6878.
  25. Ostrovskaya IM, Ostrovtsev LD, Efimov OYu. Breast Cancer in Men. Moscow: Medicine; 1988. 144 p. Russian.
  26. Jones J. Gynecomastia. [cited 2017 June 12]. Available from: http://www.radiopaedia.org/articles/gynaecomastia.
  27. Pailoor K, Fernandes H, Cs J, Marla NJ, Keshava SM. Fine needle aspiration cytology of male breast lesions - a retrospective study over a six year period. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8(10):FC13-5. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/10708.4922.

For citation: Vorotyntseva NS, Moshurov IP, Ganzya MS. Differential Radiodiagnosis of Pseudogynecomastia, Gynecomastia and Breast Cancer in Men. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63(4):40-9. Russian. DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83b8dbe7e4e8.68739970

PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)

Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 50-57

NUCLEAR MEDICINE

DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83bc2b3c3ef1.05312079

Scintigraphy and SPECT/CT of Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Planning of Operative Intervention in Breast Cancer

A.D. Ryzhkov1, M.E. Bilik1, A.S. Krylov1, K.V. Afanaseva1, M.O. Goncharov1, S.V. Shiryaev1, A.V. Petrovsky1,2, R.P. Litvinov1, N.D. Khakurinova2

1. N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ; 2. Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia

A.D. Ryzhkov - Dr. ScI. Med., Leading Researcher; M.E. Bilik - Radiologist; A.S. Krylov - PhD Med., Radiologist, Member of EANMMI; K.V. Afanaseva - PhD Med., Оncologist, Member of the Association of Russian Oncologists; M.O. Goncharov - Radiologist; S.V. Shiryaev - Prof., Dr. Sci. Med., Head of Lab., President of the OSMI, Member of EANMMI, Member of ACNMMI, Member of SNMMI; A.V. Petrovsky - PhD Med., Deputy Director for Research, Associate Prof.; R.P. Litvinov - PhD Med., Oncologist; N.D. Khakurinova - Post-Graduate Student

Abstract

Purpose: To increase the effectiveness and quality of surgery treatment for patients with early stages of breast cancer.

Material and methods: Since 2016, 25 patients with breast cancer were examined and went through surgery. A lymphotropic colloidal radiopharmaceutical labeled with 99mTc was used; it was administered (150 MBq) the day before the operation. 20 patients received this injection intradermally into periareolar zone, 4 patients received it peritumourally (under control of ultrasound), 1 - paratumorally. Lymphoscintigraphy was performed 3 hours after injection, the images were acquired using dual-head gamma camera Symbia E (Siemens, Germany). A static multiplanar imaging (scintigraphy) (anterior, posterior, lateral projections) was performed for the sentinel nodes (SN) mapping. 25 planar examinations were performed. In 3 cases additional SPECT/CT study was performed using a hybrid SPECT/CT Symbia T2 (Siemens, Germany). Surgical intervention was done on the next day after scintigraphy. During the surgery the hand-held gamma probe NEO 2000 (Johnson & Johnson, USA) was used to localize radioactivity. The lymph nodes with the highest count (hot lymph nodes) were removed and sent for immediate histological examination. The results of immediate histological examination were evaluated again during next studies of gross specimen and slides.

Results:: During scintigraphy studies planar and SPECT/CT, 26 SN were detected in 20 women (80 %). In 15 patients only one SN lymph node was found, in 4 patients - 2, and in one case 3 SN were found. Intraoperative search of SN and immediate histological examination was conducted in 22 cases, 33 SN were found, while during planar scintigraphy only 26. In three cases, after histological examination (after obtaining examination results), patient surveillance was changed, these patients did not undergo through intraoperative radiometry and a decision was to conduct a one-stage mastectomy with regional lymphadenectomy. 10 out of 22 patients which underwent intraoperative radiometry and sentinel node biopsy, with immediate histological examination had metastases in the removed nodes, therefore lymphadenectomy had been performed. In the rest 12 patients after immediate histological examination of SN no evidence of tumor growth was found, thus lymphadenectomy was not performed. In case of three patients which did not undergo through intraoperative radiometry, lymphadenectomy was performed and after histological examination only two patients had tumor-involved SN, and one patient was clear. All intraoperative results were confirmed with next follow-up histological examinations. In 5 out of 25 patients (20 %) sentinel nodes were not founded. In these 5 cases during follow up period metastases were found in regional lymph nodes, and one patient had tumor emboli in lymphatic vessels, this considered being the cause of negative scintigraphy result. In 12 cases out of 25 (48 %) it was possible to minimize surgical management, and 13 (52 %) undergo lymphadenectomy.

Conclusion: 1) The integration of SPECT/CT method of sentinel nodes search allows to plan an optimal surgical management, and can positively affect the long-term follow-up result of treatment of patients with breast cancer, and improve the quality of life. 2) The sensitivity and positive prognostic value (PPV) of planar scintigraphy and intraoperative radiometry of searching for SN are 80, 100 and 73.3, 100 %, respectively. 3) Thanks to the method of lymphoscintigraphy, 12 (48f) of 25 women it was possible to minimize surgical management without lymphadenectomy.

Key words: sentinel lymph nodes, SPECT/CT, breast cancer

REFERENCES

  1. Morrow M, Rademaker AW, Bethke KP, et al. Learning sentinel node biopsy: results of a prospective randomized trial of two techniques. Surgery. 1999;126(4):714-20; Discussion 720-2.
  2. McMasters KM, Tuttle TM, Carlson DJ, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer: a suitable alternative to routine axillary dissection in multi-institutional practice when optimal technique is used. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(13):2560-6. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.13.2560.
  3. Kang T, Yi M, Hunt KK, et al. Does blue dye contribute to success of sentinel node mapping for breast cancer? Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17 Suppl 3:280-5. DOI:10.1245/s10434-010-1235-5.
  4. McMasters KM, Wong SL, Tuttle TM, et al. Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy for breast cancer does not improve the ability to identify axillary sentinel lymph nodes. Ann Surg. 2000;231(5):724-31.
  5. Povoski SP, Olsen JO, Young DC, et al. Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing intradermal, intraparenchymal, and subareolar injection routes for sentinel lymph node mapping and biopsy in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13(11):1412-21. DOI:10.1245/s10434-006-9022-z.
  6. Yamamoto S, Maeda N, Yoshimura K, Oka M. Intraoperative detection of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients using ultrasonography-guided direct indocyanine green dye-marking by real-time virtual sonography constructed with three-dimensional computed tomography-lymphography. Breast. 2013;22(5):933-7. DOI:10.1016/j.breast.2013.05.001.
  7. Douek M, Klaase J, Monypenny I, et al. Sentinel node biopsy using a magnetic tracer versus standard technique: the sentiMAG multicentre trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(4):1237-45. DOI:10.1245/s10434-013-3379-6.
  8. Tu Weixia, Denizot B. Synthesis of small-sized rhenium sulfide colloidal nanoparticles. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2007;310(1):167-70. DOI:10.1016/j.jcis.2007.01.054.
  9. Fein DA, Fowble BL, Hanlon AL, et al. Identification of women with T1-T2 breast cancer at low risk of positive axillary nodes. J Surg Oncol. 1997;65(1):34-9.
  10. McGee JM, Youmans R, Clingan F, et al. The value of axillary dissection in T1a breast cancer. Am J Surg. 1996;172(5):501-4.
  11. Sabaté-Llobera A, Notta PC, Benítez-Segura A, et al. Selective biopsy of the sentinel lymph node in patients with breast cancer and previous excisional biopsy: is there a change in the reliability of the technique according to time from surgery? Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2015;34(1):9-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.remn.2014.09.005.
  12. Milgrom S, Cody H, Tan L, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of sentinel node-positive breast cancer patients after total mastectomy without axillary-specific treatment. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(12):3762-70. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2386-3.
  13. Derossis AM, Fey J, Yeung H, et al. A trend analysis of the relative value of blue dye and isotope localization in 2,000 consecutive cases of sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;193(5):473-8.
  14. Motomura K, Komoike Y, Hasegawa Y, et al. Intradermal radioisotope injection is superior to subdermal injection for the identification of the sentinel node in breast cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. 2003;82(2):91-6; Discussion 96-7. DOI:10.1002/jso.10200.
  15. McMasters KM, Wong SL, Martin RC 2nd, et al. Dermal injection of radioactive colloid is superior to peritumoral injection for breast cancer sentinel lymph node biopsy: results of a multiinstitutional study. Ann Surg. 2001;233(5):676-87.
  16. Krag DN, Meijer SJ, Weaver DL, et al. Minimal-access surgery for staging of malignant melanoma. Arch Surg. 1995;130(6):654-8; Discussion 659-60.
  17. Krzhivitsky PI, Kanaev SV, Novikov SN, et al. Use of SPECT-CT for visualization of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. Problems in Oncology. 2015;61(4):624-6. Russian.
  18. Semiglazov VF, Krivorotko PV, Petrovsky SG, et al. Prognostic value of the volume of axillary dissection in patients with breast cancer. In: The role of cancer registers in assessing the effectiveness of anti-cancer control: Proceedings of the scientific and practical conference of Russian oncologists. St. Petersburg; 2003. p. 176-8. Russian.
  19. Chernov VI, Afanasyev SG, Sinilkin IG, et al. Radionuclide diagnosis for detection of sentinel lymph nodes. Siberian Journal of Oncology. 2008;28(4):5-10. Russian.

For citation: Ryzhkov AD, Bilik ME, Krylov AS, Afanaseva KV, Goncharov MO, Shiryaev SV, Petrovsky AV, Litvinov RP, Khakurinova ND. Scintigraphy and SPECT/CT of Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Planning of Operative Intervention in Breast Cancer. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63(4):50-7. Russian. DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83bc2b3c3ef1.05312079

PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)

Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 63-75

NON-IONIZING RADIATION

DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83c0638debb0.86408449

M.S. Markov

Electromagnetic Fields in Biosphere: Benefit and Hazard

Research International. Williamsville NY 14221, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Abstract

This paper is written in order to summarizes the role of electromagnetic fields in the origin and evolution of life on Earth, as well as hazard and benefit from electromagnetic fields. It is an attempt to show that today the mankind and the entire biosphere are subjected to a global experiment conducted without protocol, monitoring and even knowing the parameters of the applied electromagnetic fields. At the same time, electromagnetic fields used in magnetotherapy has been proven to be beneficial in treatment of various health problems. Magnetotherapy is non-invasive, safe, and easily applied methods to directly treat the site of injury, the source of pain, and inflammation. The development of advanced communication technologies year after year increases the hazard for the biosphere and mankind. The paper discuses the contradiction between scientists and technological engineers in the line thermal or nonthermal are effects of electromagnetic fields. The specific problems with children health are analyzed. It focused on the facts that at the end of the second decade of this century more aggressive mobile communications, such as 4G and especially 5G are being introduced in the North America and Europe without any attempt to evaluate the hazard for civilization.

Key words: electromagnetic fields, mobile communication, public health, protect children

REFERENCES

  1. Gilbert W. De Magnete (written in latin). Translated and published by Dower publication; 1600. 368 p.
  2. Bassett CAL, Pawluk RJ, Pilla AA. Acceleration of fracture repair by electromagnetic fields. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1974;238:242-62.
  3. Todorov N. Magnetotherapy. Sofia: Meditzina i Physcultura Publishing House; 1982. Bulgarian.
  4. Kholodov YA. Man in Magnetic Web. Moscow: Nauka; 1976. Russian.
  5. Polk C, Postow E (eds.). CRC Handbook of Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 1986.
  6. Barnes F, Greenebaum B (eds.). Handbook of Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields, 3rd edn. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2007.
  7. Rosch PJ, Markov MS (eds.) Bioelectromagnetic Medicine. Marcel Dekker, New York. 2004.
  8. Rosch P (ed.). Bioelectromgnetic and Subtle Energy Medicine. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2015.
  9. Markov MS, Grigoriev YG. WiFi technology - an uncontrolled experiment on human health. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. 2013;32(2):200-8.
  10. Belyaev I. Biophysical mechanisms for non-thermal microwave effects. In: Markov MS (ed.) Electromagnetic Fields in Biology and Medicine. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2015.
  11. Shupak N. Therapeutic uses of pulsed magnetic-field exposure: a review. Radio Sci Bull. 2003;307:9-32.
  12. Markov MS. Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy: history, state of the art and future. Environmentalist. 2007;27:465-75.
  13. Lin J (ed.). Electromagnetic Fields in Biological Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 2011.
  14. Markov MS. Benefit and hazard of electromagnetic fields. In: Markov M (ed.). Electromagnetic Fields in Biology and Medicine. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2015. p. 15-29.
  15. IARC WHO, Classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Press release No. 208; May 31 2011. 3 p.
  16. Markov MS. Impact of physical factors on the society and environment. Environmentalist. 2012;32 (2):121-30.
  17. Kane R. Cellular Phones: Russian roulette. Vantage Press Inc. New York. 1995; 241 p.
  18. Markov MS. Thermal versus nonthermal mechanisms of interactions between electromagnetic fields and biological systems. In: Ayrapetyan SN and Markov M (eds.) Bioelectromagnetics: Current concepts. Dordrecht: Springer; 2006. p. 1-16.
  19. Markov MS. Biological effects of extremely low frequency magnetic fields. In: Ueno S (ed) Biomagnetic Stimulation, New York: Plenum Press; 1994. p. 91-102.
  20. Oltman R. 5G is coming. Microwave Journal; Oct 2017. p. 40-2.
  21. Betskii OV, Lebedeva NN. Low-intensity millimeter waves in biology and medicine. In: Rosch PJ and Markov MS (eds.). Bioelectromagnetic Medicine. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2004. p. 741-60.
  22. Bassett CAL. Fundamental and practical aspects of therapeutic uses of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs). Critical Review Biomedical Engineering. 1989;17:451-529.
  23. Bassett CAL. Therapeutic uses of electric and magnetic fields in orthopedics. In: D. Karpenter and S. Ayrapetyan (eds.) Biological Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields. San Diego: Academic Press; 1994. p. 13-8.
  24. Adey WR. Potential therapeutic applications of nontherrmal electromagnetic fields: Ensemble organization of cells in tissue as a factor in biological field sensing. In: Rosch PJ, Markov MS. (eds.) Bioelectromagnetic Medicine. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2004. p. 1-14.
  25. Valberg, P. How to plan EMF experiments. Bioelectromagnetics. 1995;16:396-401.
  26. SanPiN. Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) under occupational and living conditions. Moscow: Minzdrav; 1996. Russian.
  27. Cho CK, D’Andrea JA. Review of effects of RF fields on various aspects of human health. Bioelectromagnetics. 2003;24(S6):S5-6.
  28. Foster K. Bioelectromagnetics pioneer Herman Schwan passed away at age 90. Bioelectromagnetics Newsletter. 2005;2:1-2.
  29. Schwan HP, Piersol GM. The absorption of electromagnetic energy in body tissues. Rev Phys Med Rehabil. 1954;33(6):371-404.
  30. Michaelson SM. Human exposure to nonionizing radiant energy - potential hazards and safety standards. Proc. IEEE. 1972;1:389-421.
  31. Lin JC. Interaction of two cross-polarized electromagnetic waves with mammalian cranial structures. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME. 1977;23(5):371-5.
  32. Durney CH, Massodi E, Iskander MF. Radiofrequency Radiation Dosimetry Handbook, Rep. SAM-TR-78-22, USAF School of Aerospace Medicine. Brooks Air Force Base, Texas; 1978.
  33. Lin JC. Electromagnetic pulse interaction with mammalian cranial structures. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1976;23:61-3.
  34. Schwan HP. Microwave radiation; hot spots in conducting spheres by electromagnetic waves and biological implications. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME. 1972;19(1):53-8.
  35. Schwan HP. Microwave radiation; biophysical considerations and standards criteria. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng BME. 1972;19(4):304-12.
  36. Parliamentary Assembly. Council of Europe. 2011. Resolution 1815. The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment; 2011. Available from: http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17994.
  37. Jiang Z, Wei Hong, Nianzu Zhang, Chau Yu. Progress and challenges of test technologies for 5G. Microwave Journal. January 2018:80-94
  38. IMT-2020 5G wireless technology architecture. IMT-2020 (5G) Promotion Group, May 2015. Available from: www.scribd.com/doc/294556768/WHITE-PAPER-ON-5G-WIRELESS-TECHNOLOGY-ARCHITECTURE-pdf.
  39. Grigoriev YG. Mobile communications and health of population: the risk assessment, social and ethical problems. Environmentalist. 2012;32(2):193-200.
  40. Grigoriev YG, Khorseva NI. Mobile communications and health of children. Risk assessment of the use of mobile communication by children and adolescents. Recommendations to children and parents 2014. Moscow: Economics; 2014. 230 p. Russian.
  41. Markov MS. Magnetic and electromagnetic field dosimetry - necessary step in harmonization of standards. - Proc. WHO Meeting, Varna, April 2001. Available from: http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/Varna.
  42. Nikita KS, Kiourri A. Mobile communication field in biological systems. In: Lin J (ed.) Electromagnetic Fields in Biological Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton; 2011. p. 261-329.
  43. Koulouridis S, Nikita KS. Study of the coupling between human head and cellular phone helical antennas. IEEE Trans Electrom Compat. 2004;46:62-71.
  44. Christ A, et al. Age-dependent tissue specific exposure of cell phone users. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:1763-83.
  45. Christ A, et al. Impact of pinna compression on the RF absorption in the head of adults and juvenile cell phone users. Bioelectromagnetics. 2010;31:406-12.
  46. Grigoriev Y, Khortzeva N. A longitudinal study of psycho-physiological indicators of pupils - user mobile communication in Russia (2006-2017). Children are at the group of risk. In Markov MS (ed.) Mobile Communications and Public Health. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press; 2018. p. 237-52.
  47. WHO Backgrounder; 2003 Apr.
  48. Boice J, Tarone RE. Cell phone, cancer and children. J Natl Inst Cancer. 2011;103(16):1211-3.
  49. Justesen DR. A comparative study of human sensory thresholds: 2450 MHz microwaves vs far-infrared radiation. Bioelectromagnetics. 1982;3:117-25.

For citation: Markov MS. Electromagnetic Fields in Biosphere: Benefit and Hazard. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63(4):63-75. DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83c0638debb0.86408449

PDF (ENG) Full-text article

Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018. Vol. 63. No. 4. P. 58-62

NUCLEAR MEDICINE

DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83bf207b9b50.21392988

Diagnostic Bone-Seeking Radiopharmaceutical Agent on the Basis of Zoledronic Acid «Rezoscan, 99mTс» Preliminary Results of Comparative Clinic Studies

A.V. Tultaev, V.N. Korsunskiy, A.A. Labushkina, M.V. Zabelin

A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center, Moscow, Russia, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ; A.V. Tultaev - Senior Researcher, PhD Tech.; V.N. Korsunskiy - Leading Researcher, Dr. Sc. Med., Prof.; A.A. Labushkina - Research Worker, PhD Med.; M.V. Zabelin - Dr. Sc. Med., Prof., Head of Dep.

Abstract

Purpose: Clinical trials involving study of functions, assessment of drug and radiation safety of the radiopharmaceutical drug “Rezoscan, 99mTc” in comparison with the “Technefor, 99mTc”.

Material and methods: Clinical studies of RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc” were carried out using a diagnostic gamma camera Toshiba. The study involved 25 patients: 2 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, 3 patients diagnosed with cervical cancer, 15 patients diagnosed with breast cancer and 5 patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease without cancer, who underwent osteoscintigraphy to identify osteoporosis foci and who signed an informed consent to participate in the study. To study the functional properties of RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc”, we studied its pharmacokinetics and evaluated the quality of visualization of pathological foci in bone tissue. To assess drug safety the patient was monitored for 15 days with an assessment of acute and delayed reactions to intravenous administration. Radiation safety of the RP was estimated using values of absorbed radiation doses of organs and effective doses to patients [1]. To the same patients the radiopharmaceutical preparations “Rezoscan, 99mTc” and “Technefor, 99mTc” were injected sequentially in one day.

Results: According to the pharmacokinetics study, the accumulation of RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc” in the skeleton in 2 hours reaches 40 % of the administered amount. At the same time, a relatively rapid excretion of the drug from the soft tissues takes place, which makes it possible to clearly visualize the condition of the bone system and to reveal pathological changes with coefficients of differential accumulation (CDA) bone/soft tissues of about 10. Comparative studies of the functional characteristics of RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc” and “Technefor, 99mTc” showed the advantage of the new drug in the early detection of pathological changes in bone tissue with the metastatic skeletal lesion. In all cases in the study with RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc”on scintigrams in 15 patients with a verified diagnosis of breast cancer, the pathological foci of hyperfixation RP, which are typical for metastatic bone lesions, were visualized. In the same patients, examined with the help of the RP “Technefor, 99mTc”, pathological foci in the skeleton were visualized only in 13 cases.

According to the results of studies of patients with RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc” accuracy was 0.8, sensitivity - 0.9, specificity - 0.6. According to the study of patients of the same group with RP “Technefor, 99mTc” defined: the accuracy is 0.8, sensitivity - 0.8 and specificity - 0.4.

Based on the results of monitoring the condition of patients for 15 days, acute and delayed reactions to intravenous administration of the drug were not detected. The estimate of the absorbed radiation dose values of RP “Rezoscan, 99mTc” in organs and tissues of patients, as well as effective doses of irradiation allow us to suggest that the introduced RP activity and patient dose do not go beyond the previously established reference levels.

Conclusions: The radiopharmaceutical “Rezoscan, 99mTc” can be used for the early detection of pathological foci of bone tissue.

Key words: radiopharmaceuticals, zoledronic acid, osteoscintigraphy, “Rezoscan, 99mTc”, “Technefor, 99mTc”

REFERENCES

  1. ICRP, Publication 106, Radiation Dose to patients from Radiopharmaceuticals; 2007.
  2. Subramanian G, Agfee JG. A New Complex of Tc for Skeletal Inmaging. Radiology. 1971;99:192-6.
  3. Rosenhall L, Kaye M. Technetium-99m pyrophosphate kinetics an imaging in metabolic bone Disease. J Nucl Med. 1975;16:33-8.
  4. Schmitt G, Holmes R, Isitman A. A proposed mechanism for 99mTc-labeled polyphosphate and diphosphonate uptake by human breast tissue. Radiology. 1974;112:733-40.
  5. Tofe A, Fransis M. In vitro stabilization of a low-tin bon-imaging agent (99mTc-Sn HEDP) by ascorbic acid. J Nucl Med. 1976;17:820-6.
  6. Subramanian G, Agfee J, et al. Nc-99m-methylendifosphonate a superior agent for skeletal imaging; comparison with other technetium complexes. J Nucl Med. 1975;16:744-51.
  7. Finding a new osteotropic drugs with technetium-99m based on DTPMPA. The research reports. Institute of Biophysics. Inv. No. b-4388. Moscow; 1983. Russian.
  8. Cristy M, Eckerman K. Specific absorbed fraction of energy at varicus ages from internal photon sources. ORNL/TM-8391N1-7. Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 1987.
  9. Asikoglu M, Durak FG. The biodistribution of a therapeutic dose of zoledronic acid labeled with Tc-99m. Appl Radiat Isot. 2009;67(9):1616-21.
  10. Kasatkin YuN, Vidukov VI. Methods of decision-making in radionuclide diagnostics. Moscow; 1983. Russian.

For citation: Tultaev AV, Korsunskiy VN, Labushkina AA, Zabelin MV. Diagnostic Bone-Seeking Radiopharmaceutical Agent on the Basis of Zoledronic Acid «Rezoscan, 99mTс» Preliminary Results of Comparative Clinic Studies. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63(4)58-62. Russian. DOI: 10.12737/article_5b83bf207b9b50.21392988

PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)

Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018. Vol. 63. No. 5. P. 5–10

RADIATION SAFETY

DOI: 10.12737/article_5bc895f377f578.86526226

Innovative Technologies of Pre-Shift Psychophysiological Control of Personnel as Means of Increasing Safety of Radiation and Nuclear Enterprises and Objects of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM

A.F. Bobrov1, V.V. Ivanov2, M.Yu. Kalinina3, T.M. Novikova2, V.V. Ratayeva4, V.I. Sedin1, V.Yu. Shcheblanov1, E.S. Shchelkanova4, A.S. Samoylov1

1. A.I. Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of FMBA, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ; 2. Central Health-Sanitary Unit № 91, Lesnoy; Murmansk region, Russia; 3. The State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM, Moscow, Russia; 4. Northwest Center for Radioactive Waste Management “SevRAO”, a Branch of FSUE RosRAO, Zaozersk, Murmansk region, Russia

A.F. Bobrov – Chief Researcher, Dr. Sci. Biol., Prof.; V.V. Ivanov – Head PND, PhD Med.; M.Yu. Kalinina – Deputy Director, PhD Med.; T.M. Novikova – Medical Psychologist; V.V. Ratayeva – Specialist of Radiation and Environmental Safety; V.I. Sedin – Leading Researcher, Dr. Sci. Med., Prof.; V.Yu. Shcheblanov – Head of Lab., Dr. Sci. Biol., Prof.; E.S. Shchelkanova – Leading Specialist; A.S. Samoylov – Director General, Dr. Sci. Med., Prof. RAS

Abstract

Purpose: Validation of requirements to the hardware and software of pre-shift psychophysiological monitoring and assessment of effectiveness of use of technology of the vibraimage at pre-shift psychophysiological control of personnel of radiation and nuclear dangerous enterprises and objects of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM.

Material and methods: Pre-shift psychophysiological control of employees of Elektrochimpribor plant (20 people) and the Northwest Center for Radioactive Waste Management “SevRAO ”, a Branch of FSUE RosRAO, Zaozersk of Murmansk region (18 workers of facilities for management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste). Pre-shift psychophysiological monitoring was carried out within 3 months. During the research measurement of arterial blood pressure, assessment of health, activity and mood was taken. The psychophysiological condition was estimated according to innovative technology of the vibraimage with the use of the Vibrastaff program.

Results: Reliability improvement of a human factor is one of the main ways of improving radiation and nuclear safety of the facilities and objects of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM. It demands improving methods and means of psychophysiological providing. First of all methods,tools and criteria of pre-shift psychophysiological control. The developed requirements to the hardware and software of pre-shift psychophysiological monitoring and innovative technology of assessment of parameters of the vibraimage allow quickly (within 1 minute) to receive the decision on the admission / not the admission to work. Its practical use gives the chance, accordingto pre-shift psychophysiological control in due time, to accept organizational, medical and other administrative decisions for improving radiation and nuclear safety of the enterprises and objects of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM.

Key words: vibraimages, pre-shift medical examinations, pre-shift psychophysiological control, psychophysiological adaptation, psychophysiological “price” of work performance, radiation safety, human factor

REFERENCES

  1. Bobrov AF, Bushmanov AYu, Sedin VI, Shcheblanov VYu. System assessment of the results of psychophysiological control. Medicine of Extreme Situations. 2015;(3):13-9. Russian.
  2. Minkin VA. Vibraimage. Saint Petersburg: Renome; 2007. Russian.
  3. Program for monitoring psychophysiological state of the operator of VibraStaff [Internet ]. Saint Petersburg: Multiprofile facility ELSIS; 2018 [cited 2018 Feb 1]. Available from: http://psymaker.com/downloads/VIManualRuVS.pdf. Russian.

For citation:Bobrov AF, Ivanov VV, Kalinina MYu, Novikova TM, Ratayeva VV, Sedin VI, Shcheblanov VYu, Shchelkanova  ES, Samoylov AS. Innovative Technologies of Pre-Shift Psychophysiological Control of Personnel as Means of Increasing Safety of Radiation and Nuclear Enterprises and Objects of the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2018;63(5):5-10. Russian.

DOI: 10.12737/article_5bc895f377f578.86526226

PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)

  1. 2018-5-11_Metlyaeva_eng
  2. 2018-5-19_Timoshkina_eng
  3. 2018-5-26_Ryzhkov_eng
  4. 2018-5-33_Grigoriev_eng

Contact Information

 

46, Zhivopisnaya st., 123098, Moscow, Russia Phone: +7 (499) 190-95-51. E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Journal location

Attendance

2767881
Today
Yesterday
This week
Last week
This month
Last month
For all time
827
2948
25438
25438
75624
75709
2767881
Forecast today
1944

Your IP:216.73.216.88
Visitor Counter

© Журнал "Медицинская радиология и радиационная безопасность" 2020г.

Яндекс.Метрика

Наверх