HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2271020406v1 227/1/119    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cupp, S. L. Articles by Maidment, A. D. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cupp, S. L. Articles by Maidment, A. D. A.

Ultraviolet Protectants: Causative Agents for Screen and Image Artifacts in Radiography¹

¹ From Thomas Jefferson University, 3390 Gibbon Building, 111 S 11th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107. Received April 10, 2002; revision requested June 17; revision received July 10; accepted August 16. Address correspondence to S.L.C. (e-mail: scott.cupp@mail.tju.edu).

PURPOSE: To determine the specific causative agent(s) and mechanism of formation of opacity artifacts seen on some radiographs acquired at the authors’ facility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Various substances likely to come into contact with technologists’ hands were tested. Initial test results showed that a hand lotion with sun protection produced artifacts similar to the ones seen clinically and left no visible evidence on the screen after cleaning. Further experimental findings showed that substances without sun protection did not produce the artifacts, while other products with sun protection did produce artifacts. The four most commonly used active ingredients (ultraviolet [UV] filters) in products with sun protection were tested to determine if they produced artifacts. The temporal dependence and penetration depth of the causative agent(s) were determined. A sample of screens commonly used in radiology departments was tested to determine if artifacts were produced.

RESULTS: Each of the UV filters tested caused artifacts when added to a lotion that had no sun protection and did not produce artifacts by itself. The UV filters quickly penetrated the protective layer of the screens and therefore could not be removed with conventional cleaning methods. Artifacts appeared only when using screens with a primary emission in the UV portion of the spectrum.

CONCLUSION: The UV filters in the products with sun protection absorb the UV light emitted by the screens and cause artifacts. Screens with UV emissions are susceptible to artifacts from the use of UV protectants.

© RSNA, 2003

Index terms: Images, artifact • Radiography, storage phosphor • Screens and films