Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T08:48:55.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Decontamination of Human and Rabbit Skin Experimentally Contaminated with 99mTc Radionuclide Using the Active Components of “Shudhika”—a Skin Decontamination Kit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2012

Sudha Rana
Affiliation:
Division of CBRN Defence, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Mita Dutta
Affiliation:
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Nakshe L. Soni
Affiliation:
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Mahendra K. Chopra
Affiliation:
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Vinod Kumar
Affiliation:
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Rajeev Goel
Affiliation:
Division of CBRN Defence, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Aseem Bhatnagar
Affiliation:
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
Sarwat Sultana
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Elementology and Toxicology, Jamia Hamdard, Hamdard Nagar, New Delhi, India
Rakesh Kumar Sharma*
Affiliation:
Division of CBRN Defence, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India
*
Correspondence: Rakesh Kumar Sharma, MPharm, PhD Division of CBRN Defence Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences Brig. S. K. Mazumdar Marg Delhi-110 054, India. E-mail [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract

Introduction

Radioactive contamination can occur as a result of accidental or intentional release of radioactive materials (RM) into the environment. RM may deposit on clothing, skin, or hair. Decontamination of contaminated persons should be done as soon as possible to minimize the deleterious health effects of radiation. The goal of this study was to evaluate the decontamination efficiency (for residual contaminant) of the active components of “Shudhika,” an indigenously developed skin decontamination kit. The study kit is for external radioactive decontamination of intact skin.

Methods

Decontamination efficiency was evaluated on the skin surface of rabbit (n = 6) and human volunteers (n = 13). 99mTc sodium pertechnetate (200-250 μCi) was used as the radio-contaminant. Skin surface area (5 × 5 cm2) of thoracic abdominal region of the rabbit and the forearm and the palm of human volunteers were used for the study. Decontamination was performed by using cotton swabs soaked with chemical decontamination agents of the kit.

Results

Decontamination efficiency (% of the contaminant removed) was calculated for each component of the study. Overall effectiveness of the kit was calculated to be 85% ± 5% in animal and 92% ± 3% in human skin surfaces. Running water and liquid soap with water was able to decontaminate volunteers' hand and animal skin up to 70% ± 5%. Chemical decontamination agents were applied only for trace residues (30% ± 5%). Efficiency of all the kit components was found up to be 20% ± 3% (animal) and 28% ± 2 (human), respectively. Residual contamination after final decontamination attempt for both the models was observed to be 12% ± 3% and 5% ± 2%. After 24 and 48 hours of the decontamination procedure, skin was found to be normal (no redness, erythema and edema were observed).

Conclusion

Decontaminants of the study kit were effective in removal of localized radioactive skin contamination when water is ineffective for further decontamination. By using the chemical decontaminants of the study kit, the use of water and radioactive waste generation could be reduced. Cross-contamination could also be avoided. During radiologic emergencies where water may be radioactively contaminated, the study kit could be used.

Rana S, Dutta M, Soni NL, Chopra MK, Kumar V, Goel R, Bhatnagar A, Sultana S, Sharma RK. Decontamination of human and rabbit skin experimentally contaminated with 99mTc radionuclide using the active components of “Shudika”—a skin decontamination kit. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2012;27(2):1-5.

Type
Original Research
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Mountford, PJ. Techniques for radioactive decontamination in nuclear medicine. Semin Nucl Med. 1991;21(1):82-89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Waselenko, JK, MacVittie, TJ, Blakely, WF, et al. . Medical management of the Acute Radiation Syndrome: recommendations of the Strategic National Stockpile Radiation Working Group. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(12):1037-1051.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Mettler, FA Jr, Voelz, GL. Major radiation exposure — what to expect and how to respond. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(20):1554-1561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Nishiyama, H, Tunen, RJ, Van Lukes, SJ, Feller, PA. Survey of 99mTc contamination of laboratory personnel: hand decontamination. Radiology. 1980;13(7):549-551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Meineke, V, van Beuningen, D, Sohns, T, Fliender, TM. Medical management principles for radiation accident. Mil Med. 2003;168:219-222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Cox, RD. Decontamination and management of hazardous materials exposure victims in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 1994;23(4):761-770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Yehezkelli, U, Dushnistky, T, Hourvitz, A. Radiation terrorism: the medical challenge. Isra Med Assoc J. 2002;4:530-534.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Sharma, Rakesh Kumar. Radiological terrorism. Defence Security Alert. 2010; 1(12):72-74.Google Scholar
9. Sharma, RK, Arora, R. Fukushima, Japan: an apocalypse in the making? J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2011;3(1):331-332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Sharma, RK. Chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear disasters: Pitfalls and perils. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2010;2(3):155-156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. National Disaster Management Authority. National Disaster Management Guidelines — Nuclear and Radiological Emergencies. New Delhi, India; February 2009.Google Scholar
12. Levitin, HW, Siegelson, HJ, Dickinson, S, Haraguchi, H, Nocera, A, Turineck, D. Decontamination of mass casualties: re-evaluating existing dogma. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2003;18(3):200-207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. William, G, Reifenrath, WG, Hawkins, GS, Kurtz, MS. Percutaneous penetration and skin retention of topically applied compounds: an in vitro-in vivo study. J Pharm Sci. 1991;80(6):526-532.Google Scholar
14. Schulte, JH. The problem of radioactive contamination of skin. Arch Environ Health. 1966;13(1):96-101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Harrison, J. The fate of radioiodine applied to human skin. Health Phys. 1963;9:993-1000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Norwood, WD. Health Protection of Radiation Workers. Springfield, Illinois, USA: Charles C. Thomas; 1975:210.Google Scholar
17. Moore, PH, Mettler, FA. Skin decontamination of commonly used medical radionuclides. J Nucl Med. 1980;21:475-476.Google ScholarPubMed
18. Schofield, GB. Radioactive contamination of the skin. J Soc Cosmet Chem. 1971;22:535-545.Google Scholar
19. Merrick, MV, Simpson, JD, Liddell, S. Skin decontamination — a comparison of four methods. Br J Radiol. 1982;55:317-318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Harrison, WD. The fate of radioiodine applied to human skin. Health Phys 9:993-1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Felton, JS, Rozas, CJ. Decontamination of human skin experimentally soiled by radioactive materials. Arch Environ Health. 1960;1:87-95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Henson, PW. A note on some aspects of skin contamination by certain radionuclides in common use. Br J Radiol. 1972;45(540):938-943.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Draize, JH, Woodward, G, Calvery, HO. Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1944;82:377-390.Google Scholar