Considerations in the Handling of Radium Sources

Abstract

Since 1961 eight States have assumed licensing and regulatory powers from the Atomic Energy Commission over “by-product, source, and special nuclear material” under an Act passed by Congress in 1959. This law has accelerated development, in the States, of radiation control programs to encompass all forms of ionizing radiation, including radium which has played a major role in medical practice. A recommendation of the National Advisory Committee on Radiation (NACOR) was made to investigate the practicality and means by which less hazardous but equally effective radioactive materials can be utilized in medicine. Acting upon this recommendation, the Division of Radiological Health, United States Public Health Service, sponsored a Conference with members of the medical profession for the mutual exchange of information on radium and radium substitutes. Those invited to participate were representatives from the appropriate medical societies and prominent therapeutic centers, as well as interested parties in the Atomic Energy Commission. The Division of Radiological Health presented a summary of its radium studies. This included information obtained from a review of past radium incidents and accidents and experience of State health agencies with radium problems. The participants were then encouraged to comment on the material presented, based on their own personal experiences, and to propose possible solutions. The conclusions formulated by the Conference were accepted unanimously by the participants and will serve as valuable guide lines in radium management for the medical profession, the State and local health departments, and the United States Public Health Service. Conclusions Of Conference 1. All naturally occurring radionuc1ides, including radium, radon, mesothorium, etc., as well as accelerator-produced radionuc1ides, should be subject to the same radiation protection regulations as are reactor-produced radionuclides. 2. Because of the special contamination hazards associated with radium, due to its physical and chemical properties, minimum standards of source design, construction, and testing should be established for this radionuclide by a body of appropriate experts. 3. A suitable substitute for radium, with less contamination hazard, is desirable. Because of the large body of clinical experience accumulated with radium, substitute sources should be made available which conform to the dimensions and dose distribution patterns of existing radium sources. Cesium137 sources seem capable of satisfying these requirements. For temporary interstitial treatments where flexibility and shielding are important considerations, iridium 192 is the isotope of choice at the present time. For permanent implantation, gold 198 is a suitable substitute for radon. The use of radium plaques should be discontinued; strontium- 90 plaques furnish a suitable substitute.