Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Estimation of Dose Distribution in Patient Undergoing Hysterosalpingography Fluoroscopy-Guided Medical Procedure

Aminu Saidu, S.P. Arewa, S.A. Ogunsina, A. Bala, F. Usman, T.A. Olaniyan, M.K. Saleh, N.M. Ahmad, I.B. Mark


Real time imaging allows a wide range of exposure than the conventional radiography for producing diagnostic images. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is an effective method of evaluating abnormalities of the uterus and fallopian tube using real-time fluoroscopic procedure. The main purpose of this study was to assess the possible radiation dose deposited into different organs of female patients undergoing HSG during the reproductive period. The study was conducted at radiology department of Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano State, Nigeria. About sixty eight (68) number of patients with average age of thirty four (34) years, within the range of seventeen (17) to fifty (50) years were involved in the study. Patient’s weight and height were considered for the determination of Body Mass Index. The work took place between November 2017 to February 2018. Technique factors such as tube voltage (kV), tube current (mA) and time of exposure were compiled. Exposure of the X-ray machine in terms of μSv/mAs was measured using a Geiger Muller (GM) type detector. The findings of the study indicated that radiation doses received by patient’s organs varied significantly within the procedure. The urinary bladder received the highest dose of  while the thymus received the least dose of . The patient-specific dose ranges from  to . The mean effective dose was  and the estimated lifetime attributable risk (LAR) cancer risk for HSG fluoroscopy-guided medically procedure was found to be 1.32×10–2 ± 0.001. The radiation doses deposited to the organs of patients involved in this study does not exceeds the limit and therefore imposed no threat.


Fluoroscopy, organ dose, effective dose, patient-specific dose, cancer risk

Full Text:



Gregan AC, Peach D, McHugo JM. Patient dosimetry in hysterosalpingography: A comparative study. Br J Radiol. 1998;71:1058‑61.

K. Alzimami, A. Sulieman, E. Babikir, K. Alsafi, M. Alkhorayef, Hiba Omer, Estimation of effective dose during hysterosalpingography procedures in certain hospitals in Sudan. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. 2015; 100:2–6,0969–8043.

Darko V. Plecas, Monika M. Zivkovic, and Olivera F. Ciraj-Bjelac. Radiation dose and risk assessment in hysterosalpingography. 2010;25:217–221.

Sulieman A, Theodorou K, Vlychou M, Topaltzikis T, Roundas C, Fezoulidis I. Radiation dose optimisation and risk estimation to patients and staff during hysterosalpingography. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2008;128:217‑26.

Kramer R, Khoury HJ, Lopes C, Vieira JW. Equivalent dose to organs and tissues in hysterosalpingography calculated with the FAX (Female Adult voXel) phantom. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:893‑9.

Perisinakis K, Damilakis J, Grammatikakis J, Theocharopoulos N, Gourtsoyiannis N. Radiogenic risks from hysterosalpingography. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:1522‑8.

Karande VC, Pratt DE, Balin MS, Levrant SG, Morris RS, Gleicher N. What is the radiation exposure to patients during a gynecoradiologic procedure? Fertil Steril 1997;67:401‑3.

Akinlade BI, Farai IP, Okunade AA. (2012). Survey of dose area product received by patients undergoing common radiological examinations in four centers in Nigeria. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 13 (4).

Rehani M, Frush D. Tracking radiation exposure of patients. Lancet. 2010;


Holmberg O, Malone J, Rehani M, McLean D, Czarwinski R. Current issues and actions in radiation protection of patients. Eur J Radiol 2010;76:15‑9.

UNSCEAR. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 2008 Report to General Assembly. New York: UNSECAR; 2010.

NCRP. Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, NCRP Report 160. Bethesda, Md, USA: The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 2009.

International Atomoc Energy Agency. Dosimetry in Diagnostic Radiology: An International Code of Practice. Technical Report Sertiea No. 457, Vienna: IAEA; 2007.

Stankovi K, Vujisi M. Influence of Radiation Energy and Angle of Incidence on the Uncertainty in Measurements by GM Counters. Nucl Technol Radiat Prot. 2008;23:41‑2.

Kost SD, Fraser ND, Carver DE, Pickens DR, Price RR, Hernanaz-Schulman M, Stabin MG. (2015). Patient-Specific Dose Calculations for Pediatric CT of the Chest, Abdomen and Pelvis: Pediatr Radiol. 2015 Nov; 45 (12):1771 2015 Jul 4.

Xiang L, Ehsan S, Segars WP, Gregory M, James GC, Donald PF. Patient-specific Radiation Dose and Cancer Risk for Pediatric Chest CT. Radiology. 259(3) 862–874, 2011

Cristy M, Eckerman KF. (1987). Specific absorbed fractions of energy at various ages from internal photon sources. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge. ORNL/TM-8381/V1

Ezzo I. (2008). Determination of the conversion factor for the estimation of effective dose in lungs, urography and cardiac procedures.(M.Sc. thesis, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, University). Retrieved from


Fife IA, Wilson DJ, Lewis CA. Entrance surface and ovarian doses in hysterosalpingography. Br J Radiol. 1994;67:860‑3.

Anderson CM, Leidholdt EM. (2013). An Introduction to Fluoroscopy Safety. Retrieved from http://www.mpcphysics.

com/document/introductionto fluoroscopy

safety8–2–12/accessed 15th June, 2017

Fernández JM, Vañó E, Guibelalde E. Patient doses in hysterosalpingography. Br J Radiol 1996;69:751‑4.

Sharma R, Sunil DS, Shramika P, Ajay C, Kantharia S, Babu DAR. (2015). Radiation Dose to Patients from X-ray Radiographic Examination Using Computed Radiography Imaging System-J Med Physics. 40(1): 29–37. https://doi:1


Prins RD, Thornton RH, Schmidtlein CR, Quinn B. Ching H, Dauer LT. Estimating radiation effective doses from whole body computed tomography scans based on U.S. soldier patient height and weight. BMC Medical Imaging. 2011;11(20):1–9.–23 42/11/20


  • There are currently no refbacks.