60Co Accident, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China, 11 April 2008 |
Accident scenario |
On 11 April 2008, 60Co accident
occurred in Taiyuan, Shanxi, China, . While using 60Co to irradiate
traditional Chinese medicine in an irradiation fabrication plant, five workers
(A, B, C, D and E) entered the irradiation room by mistake and exposed to
varying degrees of gamma-rays from a 60Co source with an activity of 6.66×1014 Bq. They were approximately 80-150cm
from the source. Woker A worked for 14-15 min, worker B worked less than
15 min and C, D and E worked for 5-10 imn. |
References |
(1)
Yao, B., Li, Y., Liu, G., Guo, M., Bai, J., Man, Q., Qiu, L. and Ai, H. (2013):
Estimation of the biological dose received by five victims of a radiation
accident using three different cytogenetic tools. Mutation Res., 751:66-72. |
Chromosome aberration analysis |
. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
. | Chromosome aberration analysis in 5 workers accidentally irradiated with 60Co gamma-rays | |||||||||||||||||||||
Worker | Sex | Age | Sampling | Culture time | No. of | No. of | Distribution of cells with indicated number of Dics+Rc | |||||||||||||||
(yrs) | Tissue* | Time (h) | (h) | cells | Dic+Rc** | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ||||
A | M | 32 | PB | 16, 24 | 72 | 50 | 333 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 2 | ||||||
BM | 23 | 52 | 51 | 304 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 12 | 7 | 9 | 2 | 1 | |||||||||
Total | 101 | 637 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 10 | 19 | 18 | 25 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 1 | |||||||||
B | M | 42 | PB | 18 | 52 | 100 | 94 | 43 | 35 | 17 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |||||||||
BM | 23 | 52 | 86 | 81 | 34 | 30 | 16 | 5 | 1 | |||||||||||||
Total | 186 | 175 | 77 | 65 | 33 | 6 | 3 | 1 | ||||||||||||||
C | M | 43 | PB | 16 | 52 | 305 | 159 | 189 | 84 | 23 | 7 | 2 | ||||||||||
BM | 23 | 52 | 132 | 90 | 64 | 52 | 11 | 4 | 1 | |||||||||||||
Total | 437 | 249 | 253 | 136 | 34 | 11 | 3 | |||||||||||||||
D | M | 39 | PB | 16 | 52 | 220 | 83 | 150 | 60 | 8 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
BM | 23 | 52 | 226 | 77 | 161 | 53 | 12 | |||||||||||||||
Total | 446 | 160 | 311 | 113 | 20 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
E | M | 32 | PB | 16 | 52 | 220 | 92 | 143 | 63 | 13 | 1 | |||||||||||
BM | 23 | 52 | 200 | 92 | 128 | 59 | 8 | 3 | 2 | |||||||||||||
Total | 420 | 184 | 271 | 122 | 21 | 4 | 2 | |||||||||||||||
*) | PB: peripheral blood, BM: bone marrow (Bone marrow was cultured in culture meium with PHA and treated similarly to that of blood lymphocytes.) | |||||||||||||||||||||
**) . | Rc: centric rings | |||||||||||||||||||||
. |
Worker | Sampling | Frequencies of MN | Frequencies of PCC-Rings | ||||||||||||||||||||
No. of | No. of | Distribution of MN | No. of | No. of | Distribution of PCC-R | ||||||||||||||||||
Tissue | Time (h) | cells | MN | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | cells | PCC-R | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||||
A | PB | 16 | 3 | 11 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 0 | ||||||||||||||
PB | 24 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||||||||
BM | 23 | 4 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 104 | 65 | 64 | 22 | 12 | 5 | 1 | ||||||||||
B | PB | 16 | 616 | 443 | 308 | 203 | 82 | 16 | 7 | 172 | 29 | 147 | 21 | 4 | |||||||||
C | PB | 16 | 681 | 345 | 414 | 205 | 48 | 12 | 2 | 83 | 12 | 75 | 6 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
D | PB | 16 | 620 | 217 | 457 | 116 | 41 | 5 | 1 | 136 | 9 | 128 | 7 | 1 | |||||||||
. | E | PB | 16 | 951 | 466 | 605 | 245 | 85 | 14 | 1 | 1 | 85 | 5 | 81 | 3 | 1 | |||||||
. |
Commentary at data compilation
The dose-distribution profiles by unfolding
Dic+Rc distribution. The dose distribution profiles below are not adjusted
by lymphocyte survival (For method, see Sasaki MS, Int. J. Radiat. Biol.,
79:83-97, 2003). The
commentary given here is the one added at the time of data compilation, and
does not necessarily reflect the conclusion of the authors.