Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Radiation Physics and Chemistry

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/radphyschem

Conventional and new lead-free radiation shielding materials for radiation T

protection in nuclear medicine: A review
Nadin Jamal AbuAlRoosa, Noorfatin Aida Baharul Amina, Rafidah Zainona,b,*
a
Oncological and Radiological Sciences Cluster, Advanced Medical and Dental Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia, SAINS@BERTAM, 13200, Kepala Batas, Pulau Pinang,
Malaysia
b
School of Physics, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800, Gelugor, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Gamma ray is an energetic ionising radiation that can damage living cells as it slows down and transfers its
Ionising radiation energy to surrounding cells. Lead and concrete have been used as radiation shielding materials. However, it
Gamma radiation shows that lead toxicity is an important environmental disease and its effects on the human body are devas-
Lead tating. Thus, there is an urgent need to find a sustainable radiation shielding material to safeguard the human
Lead-free material
and the environment from destructive impact of radiation. High atomic number and high-density materials such
Radiation protection
Radiation shielding
as tungsten and concrete are the best effective characteristics of radiation shielding materials. There are nu-
merous experimental and theoretical works were performed on radiation shielding materials. This paper presents
a review on the application of lead as radiation shielding material, current safety issues related to lead, current
work on radiation shielding material and recent development of new lead-free shielding materials in nuclear
medicine.

1. Introduction
Different radiation shielding materials have been produced to
safeguard the human and their surroundings from destructive impact of
radiation (Oto et al., 2015; Singh et al., 2014). Weight, space and cost of
the shielding material are important concerns that confront researchers
in finding appropriate radiation shielding materials. Materials used for
gamma radiation should have high density such as concrete or lead
(Luković et al., 2015). Although low density materials can compensate
with increased thickness to reduce the intensity of radiation, high
density materials are more effective.
A good perceiving of gamma ray interaction with matter is the first
key to find radiation shielding material with appropriate physical
properties. Materials with high atomic number and high-density ele-
ments imposed high probability of interactions and larger energy
transfer with gamma rays considered as a good choice for effective
gamma shields. Heavy materials known to have high ability in at-
tenuation of gamma rays which is the most important characteristic of a
radiation shielding material for radiation protection (Singh et al., 2014;
Chang et al., 2015).
For many years, lead was the primary used radiation shielding
material. Lead's physical and mechanical properties make it excellent
radiation shielding material. Recently, concern has been growing that
the use of lead poses a safety and health hazards. Lead introduces an
insidious hazard to the workers and patients that affecting biochemical
systems of the human body (Ogawa et al., 2008; Hsiao et al., 2011; Eid
and Zawia, 2016). Thus, substitution of lead with non-toxic materials is
vital. Nowadays, recent studies focus on finding a non-toxic, light,
flexible and low-cost radiation shielding material.
Glass materials are suitably alternatives to lead and concrete due to
their physical and optical properties that can be easily modified by
composition and preparation technique (Ersundu et al., 2018). Nowa-
days, glasses and glass-ceramic have been utilised in radiation shielding
applications. In addition, glasses have the ability to be doped with
considerable amounts of heavy metals such as Bi2O3, PbO, WO3 and
MoO3 (Sayyed et al., 2019a,b) to make it as an effective lead-free ra-
diation shielding material.
Recently, many researchers have studied and reported various glass
systems for their possible applications as gamma-ray shielding mate-
rials such as bismuth borate glasses, lead borate glasses, lead borate and
bismuth lead borate glasses, barium borate flyash glasses, lead borate
glasses, phosphate glasses containing Bi2O3, PbO and BaO, lead stron-
tium borate glasses, lead sodium borate glasses, silicate glasses con-
taining Bi2O3, PbO and BaO, barium-bismuth-borosilicate glasses,

*
Corresponding author. Oncological and Radiological Sciences Cluster, Advanced Medical and Dental Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia, SAINS@BERTAM,
13200, Kepala Batas, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
E-mail address: rafidahzainon@usm.my (R. Zainon).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2019.108439
Received 30 May 2019; Received in revised form 21 July 2019; Accepted 26 July 2019
Available online 07 August 2019
0969-806X/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al.
SiO2–B2O3–Al2O3–CaO–Na2O glasses, BaO:B2O3:Fly ash glasses lead
and barium phosphate glasses, silicate glasses containing Bi2O3, bis-
muth borosilicate glasses, heavy-metal oxide glasses, PbO–SiO2–Al2O3
and Bi2O3–SiO2–Al2O3 glasses, PbO–BaO– B2O3 glasses, tellurite
glasses, and PbO‒Li2O‒B2O3 glasses (Tekin et al., 2017; Kurudirek
et al., 2018; Elbashir et al., 2018; Mahapatra and Barai, 2018).
2. Criteria of gamma radiation shielding material
Gamma ray is a high energy electromagnetic radiation with no
charge and no rest mass. Gamma rays emitted from nucleus of an ex-
cited atom during nuclear decay process (the decay from high energy
states of atomic nuclei to a lower state (Tsoulfanidis and Landsberger,
2015). They frequently accompany the emission of alpha and beta ra-
diation as the excited nuclear states are created in the decay of a parent
radionuclide. Gamma rays have very short wavelength and quite high
frequency of the electromagnetic radiation. Thus, it can penetrate
anything except the densest matter. Gamma ray is energetic ionising
radiation and thus biologically hazardous.
Although gamma rays are electrically neutral, they can ionise atoms
directly through photoelectric effect and Compton effect (Mcalister,
2012). It travels at speed of light and can travel thousands of meters in
air before spending their energy (Kaur et al., 2018). Thus, they can
easily penetrate matter and pass through human body effortlessly as
well. It can damage living cells as it slows down and transfers its energy
to the surrounding cells. The nature of gamma radiation makes it very
dangerous to the people who deals with it. On the hand, there is a good
benefit of usage of gamma ray in term of its applications in nuclear
medicine field.
Since gamma radiation can easily penetrate matter, it is biologically
hazardous to living cells. Thus, it must be shielded by very dense ma-
terial. High density and atomic number are desirable characteristics for
gamma ray shielding. Researchers are continuously looking for a sus-
tainable radiation shielding material for radiation protection (Mann
et al., 2016). A material that can block maximum part of incident
gamma photons considered as good shielding material (Manual et al.,
2010).
3. Lead as a radiation shielding material
3.1. Lead properties
Lead has very good physical properties that makes a good shield
property against gamma ray in nuclear medicine. The main advantage
of using lead shield is its compactness due to its high density (Mirji and
Lobo, 2017; Hulbert and Carlson, 2009). However, this radiation
shielding material is dangerous to health because of its toxicity and the
dust particles that formed on the surfaces of lead objects (Hulbert and
Carlson, 2009). Moreover, the lead physical properties such as strength
and hardness are not good for the hard environment. In this regard,
searching for lead-free gamma radiation shielding is a serious issue as
lead material proved to be toxic to human health.
3.2. Lead application in radiation protection
Lead is a common radiation shielding material for radiation pro-
tection. The application of lead includes the use lead lined drywall and
lead lined plywood in the construction of the laboratory and ex-
amination room walls, floors and ceilings. Lead angles are designed to
provide leak-proof nuclear shielding when there are cut-outs or pene-
trations.
Furthermore, lead glass provides visibility and effective gamma and
X-ray radiation shielding for observation rooms and laboratories. In
addition, lead bricks are used for shielding against primary gamma
radiation radioactive during isotope preparation. Lead bricks are
usually found within the radio-pharmacy unit to shield against higher
2
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439
radiation levels (Hulbert and Carlson, 2009).
3.3. Safety issues with lead radiation shielding material in nuclear medicine
3.3.1. Lead dust
Most of radioactive tracers in nuclear medicine emit gamma ra-
diation. This gamma radiation has a strong penetrating ability. Lead is
widely used as a radiation shielding material in nuclear medicine due to
its excellent shielding material properties (Cunningham, 2007; Khan
et al., 2010). However, this radiation shielding material can be dan-
gerous due to formation of dust on the surface of lead objects. The lead
dust may become airborne and be inadvertently inhaled or ingested by
human (Hulbert and Carlson, 2009).
Furthermore, lead dust on the skin and the clothes of workers may
also be taken home from work which is known as take-home exposure;
it settles on surfaces from where it is then inhaled or ingested by young
children with normal mouthing behaviours (Burns et al., 2017). A study
done by Hulbert et al., showed that lead dust is a major source of lead
exposure in children (Hulbert and Carlson, 2009). Lead dust is taken in
through the lungs and gastrointestinal tract. Children have a higher
respiratory rate than adults do, thus, children tend to respire and absorb
more airborne lead. After absorption, lead enters the child's blood-
stream, where it becomes a powerful and versatile toxin. Lead can affect
the central and peripheral nervous systems, bone marrow, kidneys,
myocardium, endocrine and immune systems.
This is a potentially troubling finding, as lead-based dust is a well-
known source of exposure that can be absorbed into the blood either by
inhalation or by accidental ingestion, resulting in elevated blood lead
levels. Furthermore, the lead dust can also contaminate floors and other
nearby work surfaces (Dehghan et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2012). This
exposure should be minimised as much as possible (Materna et al.,
2004). Airborne lead content monitoring is required because inhalation
of lead particles is considered the main pathway into the body for
workers.
3.3.2. Health hazards associated with lead shielding
The two most widely documented and predominantly routes of
entry for toxins derived from lead bricks are inhalation and ingestion.
When handling or working with lead shielding, the most common way
that lead enters the body is via inhalation of airborne lead particles.
When a lead brick is moved, lead dust is created and it can be inhaled
into the lungs and upper respiratory tract (T P Martinez and Cournoyer,
2001).
Some studies suggest that dermal exposure is a mode of access for
lead absorption but this may indeed reflect dermal contact leading to
ingestion (Stevenson et al., 2008). Another means of uptake not gen-
erally considered is that of in-utero transmission across the placenta to
the brain of the foetus in women exposed to lead during pregnancy
(Papanikolaou et al., 2005). Lead is neither biodegradable nor quickly
excreted from the body, making its effects long term and cumulative.
Human exposure to lead can induce toxic effects on haematological,
cardiovascular, nervous and reproductive systems. The adverse health
effects of lead exposure in children and adults are well documented
(Dehghan et al., 2014; Millstone et al., 1995; Heath et al., 2003; Healey
et al., 2009; Flakus, 1982; Bornefalk et al., 2006; Oteiza, 2008; Navas-
acien et al., 2007; Vaziri, 2008).
3.3.3. Lead back pain
Lead-equivalent shields, usually referred to as lead aprons are used
to protect workers against radiation. With daily use, bending, or im-
proper handling, the lead sheets and covering layers may split and, with
growing gaps, lose their effectiveness as protection against scattered
ionising radiation (Burns et al., 2017). For these reasons, shields un-
dergo regular radiographic assessment for gaps and cracks and those
deemed unacceptable are removed from circulation (Mahesh et al.,
2015; Smith et al., 2016, 2018).
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439

The major cause of low-back pain in technologists are continuous Table 1

overuse of back muscles. Several types of cumulative trauma disorder Atomic number and density of lead, tungsten, and bismuth.
are possible in the clinical setting in nuclear medicine because of the Material Atomic number (Z) Density (gm/cm3)
heavy weight of lead bricks used in the clinical setting. For example,
Myalgia is pain in one or more muscles, and tendonitis is inflammation Lead 82 11.30
Tungsten 74 19.11
of a tendon. Epicondylitis involves inflammation of and pain in certain
Bismuth 83 9.80
bony prominences in the area of the elbow, usually resulting from ex-
cessive strain on and twisting of the forearm (Bolus, 2019).
Table 2
3.3.4. Immune system Cost comparison of radiation shielding materials.
Human exposure to lead can induce various biological effects de-
Material Density(g/cm3) Z Cost, $/lb Bricka weight, 1b Cost, $
pending upon the level and duration of exposure. Several studies de-
monstrated that exposure to lead is associated to toxic effects also on Lead 11.30 82 $0.22 26 $5.74
the immune system, thus increasing the incidence of allergy, infectious Tungsten 19.11 74 $4.00 44 $176.58
disease, autoimmunity or cancer (Fenga et al., 2017). Bismuth 9.80 83 $3.60 23 $81.50
Copper 8.92 29 $0.83 21 $17.12
It is well-established that exposure to lead can promote the devel-
Iron 7.86 26 $0.19 18 $3.40
opment of several diseases and disorders through different mechanisms
of toxicity. The hypothesis that the immune system represents a critical a
Brick dimensions are 2″ x 4″ x 8” (5 cm × 10 cm x 20 cm).
target for lead-induced toxicity has been suggested by recent epide-
miological and experimental studies (Hengstler et al., 2003). through pair production, bismuth, a non-hazardous replacement pro-
vides sufficient protection without hampering the productivity of the
3.3.5. Reproductive systems worker. For medium range radiation sources that undergo the Compton
The reproductive system of both males and females is affected by scatter, tungsten with a density, almost twice that of lead is the non-
chronic, high-dose exposures of lead (T P Martinez and Cournoyer, hazardous material of choice (T P Martinez and Cournoyer, 2001,
2001). In males, the sperm count is reduced and other changes occur in Timothy P Martinez and Cournoyer, 2001).
the volume of sperm when blood lead levels exceed 40 μg/dL. Activities Table 1 shows a summary of atomic number and density of lead,
like motility and the general morphology of sperm are also affected at tungsten and bismuth as radiation shielding materials. The shielding
this level (Navas-acien et al., 2007). The problems with the re- properties of lead versus bismuth and tungsten are compared within the
productivity of females due to lead exposure are more severe. Toxic photoelectric effect range as shown in Fig. 1. It shows that the mass
levels of lead can lead to miscarriages, prematurity, low birth weight, attenuation coefficient and density factors are important parameters for
and problems with development during childhood (Park et al., 2008). shielding effectiveness than the atomic number of the material in the
low-energy gamma ray range. On the other hand, tungsten offers almost
3.3.6. Renal system twice as effective as lead or bismuth for gamma rays with energies over
A number of studies found that low level environmental lead ex- 2 MeV (see Table 2).
posure is associated with accelerated deterioration of chronic renal Fig. 2 shows a comparison between pure lead, bismuth and tungsten
insufficiency (Yu and Lin, 2004). Even at levels far below the limits of at different energy. The relative shielding effectiveness of lead and
normal ranges in the general population, both blood lead level and bismuth is reduced to one-quarter that of lead. It shows that bismuth is
blood lead burden were found to be increased, predicting accelerated slightly more effective than lead at shielding. Tungsten is the best
progression of chronic renal disease (Wani et al., 2015). shielding material where small thickness of tungsten is required to
shield high energy of gamma radiation.
3.3.7. Nervous system Based on the previous mentioned study; there are no toxic or en-
Brain is the most sensitive organ to lead exposure (Cleveland et al., vironmental hazards associated with shielding made from tungsten or
2008). In children, synapse formation is greatly affected in the cerebral bismuth. Moreover, decontamination procedures and industrial hygiene
cortex by lead. Lead also interferes with the development of neuro- support are not needed. No additional hazards are introduced by re-
chemicals, including neurotransmitters, and organisation of ion chan- placing lead with tungsten or bismuth. Tungsten is more effective
nels (Asic and Of, 2008). Lead poisoning also causes loss of neuron shielding material than lead against medium-energy sources that ex-
myelin sheath, reduction in the number of neurons. Furthermore, it also hibit Compton effect while bismuth is more effective than lead against
interferes with neurotransmission and decreases neuronal growth lower-energy sources that undergo the photoelectric effect. Bismuth is a
(Rudolph et al., 2011). convenient substitute material for lead as it shares many of the same
characteristics that are desirable for gamma ray shielding such as high
4. Current work on radiation shielding material density and high atomic number.
One of the disadvantages of using bismuth as radiation shielding
4.1. Elimination and substitution of lead material is that it is brittle in its pure form and not conducive to forming
bricks. Thus, many commercial bismuth bricks are made of a bismuth-
Lead is a hazardous substance, making it a disposal and industrial polymer blend (Peterson, 2009).
hygiene problem. For many years, lead has been widely employed for
shielding personnel from radioactive sources. Recently, there has been
a growing concern that the use of lead poses a safety and long-term 4.2. Lead coating
health hazard to counting facility personnel (Peterson, 2009).
Previous research done at the Los Alamos National Laboratory has Lead can be converted into less toxic by coating with a metal or
explored the costs and benefits of replacing lead with bismuth for polymer coatings. Metal coating is preferred over organic polymers
routine shielding of personnel from radioactive sources (Timothy P because they are relatively more resistant to radiation damage. It is
Martinez and Cournoyer, 2001). Complete elimination of lead in the difficult to find a polymer that can bear against the abrasion and ra-
workplace, especially at nuclear facilities is desired. For radiation diation conditions for many years to which lead bricks might be sub-
shielding against lower-energy sources that undergo photoelectric ef- jected. Nevertheless, polymer coatings are applicable and safe for op-
fect or high-energy X-rays and gamma-rays that interact primarily erations where the shielding will not be exposed to higher radiation

3
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al.
Fig. 1. Comparison of gamma shielding materials. Retrieved from Timothy P Martinez and Cournoyer (2001).
levels (Nambiar and Yeow, 2012).
Lead bricks can be coated with Aluminium by several methods:
electroplating, physical vapor deposition (PVD), and plasma spray de-
position. Electroplating is not the best option because the process leads
to some attack on the lead. Many materials are coated with Aluminium
via PVD. Plasma spray is a cruder process than PVD, but the process
may be sufficient for lead bricks. Adhesion, uniformity, and surface
properties are main problem to be considered in choosing a proper way
of coating. Plasma spray is cheaper than PVD. In either case, only a
small amount of Aluminium per brick is required. Overall, Aluminium
produces a very durable coating. The Aluminium coating can be ano-
dised, if necessary, after application. This makes the coating harder and
more corrosion resistant. If the coating is too thin, wearing would be a
problem.
Another commercially available temporary coating is coating made
of polyurethane. The coating dries very fast. This coating is char-
acterised as a non-hazardous waste. Other organic polymer coatings
include lead sheeting coated with 0.5 mm or 1.0 mm of vinyl.
On the other hand, there is an issue regarding the removal of a
coating without transferring radioactive particulates because simple
Fig. 2. Comparison of lightweight gamma shielding materials. Retrieved from Timothy P Martinez and Cournoyer (2001).
4
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439
movement of uncoated lead bricks generates enough airborne lead to
expose a worker. Metal-coated surfaces are easier to clean than those
coated with lead because metals used as coatings can produce hard,
smooth surfaces while lead itself is soft, easy to scratch, and hard to
clean. Previous study showed that simple cleaning, with an industrial
solvent, can lower the surface count on selected surfaces to 100 K cm.
Concerning polymer coatings, they can readily be removed and re-
applied (Cournoyer, 2000).
4.3. Development of new lead-free radiation shielding materials
The use of lead shots makes the material toxic in nature and
therefore, there is an urgent need to avoid the use of lead-based ma-
terials for shielding applications, as it ranks second in the list of ha-
zardous material. A study performed by Manish et al., developed an
advanced non-toxic synthetic radiation shielding aggregate by ceramic
processing of red mud. The novel process utilised industrial waste
namely red mud and barium containing additives (Mann et al., 2016).
From the reported novel work for the development of advanced,
non-toxic, synthetic radiation shielding aggregate, a conclusion can be
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al.
Fig. 3. Variation of linear attenuation coefficient (in cm) with photon energy in a range of 0.015-15 Mev for heavy metal oxide glasses; 70 BiO2: 30 SiO2, 70 BaO:30
SiO2, 70 Bi2O3:30 B2O3, 70 PbO:30 SiO2, and 10 ZnO:30 Bi2O3: 60 B2O3 (Retrieved from Singh et al., 2014).
drawn that combination of red mud, an Aluminium industry waste can
be successfully used as resource material, for making highly value-
added radiation shielding material. Furthermore, orthopaedic traumas
caused by the weight of lead aprons have been reported in many studies
(Klein et al., 2009; Moore and Novelline, 1992). As a result, several
researchers attempted to design light lead free radiation shields for
radiation protection (Zuguchi et al., 2008; McCaffrey et al., 2007;
Webster and Ph, 1966; Yaffe et al., 1991). The proposed three-layered
shield composed of tungsten, bismuth and gadolinium showed sig-
nificant attenuation properties with acceptable shielding at 140 keV
energy in nuclear medicine.
The shielding properties of lead-free materials were investigated at
photon energies that commonly used in diagnostic radiology and nu-
clear medicine. Various single and multi-layered shields composed of
barium, bismuth, gadolinium, tin and tungsten were simulated using
Monte Carlo simulations to develop environment-friendly shields,
which are lighter than conventional lead aprons. Based on the findings,
the three-layered shields composed of tungsten, bismuth and gadoli-
nium can be a proper substitute for lead in both diagnostic radiology
and nuclear medicine (Zehtabian et al., 2015).
According to US Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), lead is the second substance
of the top 20 hazardous substances list (Millstone et al., 1995). A study
by performed by Dehghan et al., developed a new non-lead paint based
on nano metal powder for radiation protection against X-ray and
gamma radiation in Nuclear and Radiological department (Dehghan
et al., 2014). Different nano metal powders were dispersed in epoxy
paints to assess their attenuation properties. The study shows that
layers made of 15% nano tungsten trioxide and 85% nano tin dioxide in
an epoxy paint matrix can be considered as a non-toxic, resistant to
erosion, lightweight and with widely applicable on the equipment and
walls substitute for conventional lead shields.
4.4. Glasses used in shielding gamma rays
There are some drawbacks of using metals as radiation shielding
material. Metals are not transparent to visible light. Thus, it restricts
one to see through it. Nowadays, glasses prove to be promising alter-
nates to the conventional shielding materials according to their extra-
ordinary physical and chemical properties such as good transparency to
visible light, high density, ease of fabrication, and non-toxicity. Bismuth
5
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439
based systems are non-toxic and proved to be new possibility for lead
free radiation shielding glasses (Kumar, 2017; Dong and Sayyed, 2017;
Zoulfakar et al., 2017).
4.4.1. Bismuth barium/bismuth borate glasses
Several studies were performed on bismuth glass and barium glass
as radiation shielding materials. These glasses have double functions of
being transparent to visible light and gamma radiation absorbent.
Bismuth and barium play an important role in radiation shielding glass
with high possibility of replacing lead because of its environmental
toxicity (Chanthima et al., 2017).
Bismuth borate glasses are environmentally friendly. These glasses
are transparent to visible light and have low melting points. They have
high density values and high refraction index (Kaundal, 2016). Results
show that bismuth borate glasses can be an alternative radiation
shielding material for gamma radiation. Borate glass properties such as
density, moisture resistance, infrared optical transparency, rate of
crystallisation and refractive indexed can be enhanced by doping it with
heavy metals oxides such as bismuth oxides, BiO3, and molybdenum
oxides, MoO3 (Sayyed et al., 2019).
A comparative study was conducted on radiation shielding proper-
ties of silicate and borate heavy metal oxide glasses with lead. In this
study, the type of heavy metal oxides used were silicate glasses (con-
taining Bi2O3, BaO and PbO), bismuth borate glass and zinc bismuth
borate glass. Results from this study show that these materials are very
useful for gamma ray shielding and the best candidate for lead-free
shielding material (V. P Singh et al., 2014).
Fig. 3 shows a result of variation of linear attenuation coefficient (in
cm) with photon energy in a range of 0.015–15 MeV for heavy metal
oxide glasses. The figure shows that 70 Bi2O3:30 SiO2 glass has the
largest attenuation value, followed by 70 Bi2O3:30 B2O3, 70 PbO:30
SiO2, and 10 ZnO:30 Bi2O3:60 B2O3 and the lowest attenuation value
was the 70 BaO:30 SiO2 glass. It can be concluded that lead-free bis-
muth silicate glass is a superior gamma radiation shielding glass that
offers identical shielding effect to lead silicate and bismuth borate
glasses. Therefore, lead-free bismuth borate glass with higher attenua-
tion value is considered to be another suitable material for gamma
radiation shielding (Singh et al., 2014).
4.4.2. Tellurite glasses
Lead-based glasses have begun to lose their popularity because of
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al.
their toxicity. Recent studies are moving towards synthesis of heavy
metal oxide glasses, especially tellurite glasses for radiation shielding
application. Tellurite glasses has high demand as a radiation shielding
material due to its unique properties, such as nontoxicity, high density,
high refractive index and high chemical resistance. Several studies
showed that tellurite glasses have high radiation shielding efficiency.
Moreover, an addition of WO3 or B2O3 can enhance this behaviour
(Ersundu et al., 2017; Tekin et al., 2018). Tellurite glasses absorb
gamma radiation more efficiently than concrete and lead glass
(Gaikwad et al., 2018). Moreover, an increase in TeO2 content in glass
will improve the gamma radiation shielding capability of the glasses.
4.5. Composites materials as gamma radiation shielding material
Lead is known for its toxicity to human and environmental.
Composite materials are materials that consists of two or more sub-
stances with different physical and chemical characteristics (Ambika
et al., 2017; Singh et al., 2015). Polymer composites are non-toxic and
environmentally friendly materials with light weight that make it a
suitable material for radiation shielding (Atashi et al., 2018; Nambiar
and Yeow, 2012). It has unique properties such as reasonable costs,
high flexibility, good mechanical strength, interesting optical and
electrical properties. An experiment carried out by Zhong et al., was
based on fabrication of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fiber
reinforced Nano epoxy composites. This study shows that an addition of
graphitic nanofibers in the matrix gives a good impact on radiation
shielding performance (Zhong et al., 2009). Polymer composites can be
doped with materials of high atomic number other than lead. These
composites have lower effective density compared to lead but still it can
provide sufficient protection against gamma radiation.
Another study shows that materials composed of hydrogen, carbon,
oxygen, silicon, and gadolinium are known as carbohydrates-based
compounds and they can be considered as new non-toxic radiation
shielding materials. Based on the findings, a 2 mm thickness of the
carbohydrates-based compound reduce up to 5% and 50% of 1 Mev and
35 keV energy respectively for the same thickness of lead (Keddy and
Nam, 2015).
4.6. Alloys as radiation shielding materials
Alloy is a mixture of metals and other elements (Akman et al.,
2018). Alloying enhance the specific characteristics and properties of
metals. Thus, metallic alloys used as an alternative radiation shielding
materials (Şakar and Kurudirek, 2019; Akman et al., 2019, Kaur et al.,
2019). Alloys can be classified based on the base metal, compositions,
and application as shown in Table 3.
Replacement of lead by tungsten-brass composites (pseudo alloy of
W, Cu, and Zn) was performed to investigate an alternative material for
lead in respect to material density (Ali Basheer Azeez et al., 2014).
Results show that linear attenuation coefficient increases with the in-
crease in the tungsten weight percentage. Furthermore, samples with
the high tungsten weight has the highest hardness values (Azeez et al.,
2014).
5. Conclusion
Radiation shielding effectiveness depends upon the radiation en-
ergy, type, and thickness of shielding material. In summary, high
atomic number and high-density materials such as lead, tungsten and
concrete provide best effective shielding against gamma radiation
against lead. This review study shows that there is an urgent need to
find alternative radiation shielding material to replace the lead.
Lead is a heavy metal which has been widely used in various in-
dustrial and domestic settings, due to its physical and chemical prop-
erties. However, lead has been classified as possible human carcinogen
and its inorganic compounds as probable human carcinogens by the
6
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439
International Agency for Research on Cancer. Nowadays, most of the
work focus on lead-free radiation shielding material that can be used as
gamma radiation shielding. There are variety of lead-free material that
can be a suitable material for radiation shielding in nuclear medicine
based on its cost-effectiveness, practicality and physical properties.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support from
Universiti Sains Malaysia Bridging Grant (Account Number: 304/
CIPPT/6316267) and Universiti Sains Malaysia Fellowship for this
study.
References
Akman, F., et al., 2018. Investigation of photon shielding performances of some selected
alloys by experimental data, theoretical and MCNPX code in the energy range of 81
keV-1333 keV. J. Alloy. Comp. 772 (1), 516–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.
2018.09.177. Elsevier B.V.
Akman, F., et al., 2019. Study of gamma radiation attenuation properties of some selected
ternary alloys. J. Alloy. Comp. 782 (4), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.
2018.12.221.
Ambika, M.R., Nagaiah, N., Suman, S.K., 2017. Role of bismuth oxide as a reinforcer on
gamma shielding ability of unsaturated polyester based polymer composites. J. Appl.
Polym. Sci. 134 (13), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.44657.
Asic, H.E., Of, C., 2008. Toxicology, the basic science of poisons. In: Toxicology, the Basic
Science of Poisons, 7th ed. pp. 1331.
Atashi, P., et al., 2018. Efficient , flexible and lead-free composite based on room tem-
perature vulcanizing silicone rubber/W/Bi 2 O 3 for gamma ray shielding applica-
tion. J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 29 (14), 12306–12322. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10854-018-9344-1. Springer US.
Azeez, A.B., et al., 2014. Replacement of lead by green tungsten-brass composites as a
radiation shielding material. Appl. Mech. Mater. 679, 39–44. Trans Tech
Publications. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.679.39.
Bolus, N.E., 2019. Review of common occupational hazards and safety concerns for nu-
clear medicine technologists. J. Nucl. Med. Technol. 36 (1), 11–17. https://doi.org/
10.2967/jnmt.107.043869.
Bornefalk, H., et al., 2006. Single-shot dual-energy subtraction mammography with
electronic spectrum splitting: Feasibility. Eur. J. Radiol. 60 (2), 275–278. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.08.004.
Burns, K.M., et al., 2017. Lead aprons are a lead exposure hazard. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 14
(5), 641–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.10.024. Elsevier Inc.
Chang, L., et al., 2015. Preparation and characterization of tungsten/epoxy composites
for γ-rays radiation shielding. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Section B: Beam
Interactions with Materials and Atoms, vol. 356 (8), 88–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.nimb.2015.04.062. Elsevier B.V.
Chanthima, N., et al., 2017. Study on interaction of Bi2O3, PbO and BaO in silicate glass
system at 662 keV for development of gamma-rays shielding materials. Progress in
Nuclear Science and Technology 1 (2011), 106–109. https://doi.org/10.15669/pnst.
1.106.
Cleveland, B.L.M., et al., 2008. Lead hazards for pregnant women and children: Part 1:
Immigrants and the poor shoulder most of the burden of lead exposure in this
country. Part 1 of a two-part article details how exposure happens, whom it affects,
and the harm it can do. AJN The American Journal of Nursing 108 (10), 40–49.
Cournoyer, M.E., 2000. Glovebox Decontamination Technology Comparison. Los Alamos
National Lab., Los Alamos, NM (US), pp. 99–1189 (February).
Cunningham, G., 2007. Lead Toxicology and assessment in general practice. Aust. Fam.
Physician 36 (12), 1011–1013.
Dehghan, N., et al., 2014. Novel paint design based on nanopowder to protection against
X and gamma rays. Indian J. Nucl. Med.: IJNM: Off. J. Soc. Nucl. Med. India 29 (1),
18. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-3919.125763.
Dong, M., Sayyed, M.I., 2017. Enhancement of gamma ray shielding properties by PbO
partial replacement of WO3 in ternary 60TeO2–(40-x)WO3–xPbO glass system.
Chalcogenide Lett. 14 (3), 113–118.
Eid, A., Zawia, N., 2016. Consequences of lead exposure, and it's emerging role as an
epigenetic modifier in the aging brain. Neurotoxicology 56 (1), 4–11. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.neuro.2016.04.006. Elsevier B.V.
Elbashir, B.O., et al., 2018. Comparison of Monte Carlo simulation of gamma ray at-
tenuation coefficients of amino acids with XCOM program and experimental data.
Results in Physics 9 (6), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2018.01.075. The
Authors.
Ersundu, A.E., et al., 2017. The heavy metal oxide glasses within the WO 3 -MoO 3 -TeO 2
system to investigate the shielding properties of radiation applications. Prog. Nucl.
Energy 104 (9), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2017.10.008.
Ersundu, Ç., Ersundu, A.E., Kityk, I.V., 2018. Investigation on gamma and neutron ra-
diation shielding parameters for BaO/SrO‒Bi2O3‒B2O3 glasses. Radiation Physics
and Chemistry 145 (4), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.12.
010. Elsevier Ltd.
Fenga, C., et al., 2017. Immunological effects of occupational exposure to lead (Review).
Mol. Med. Rep. 15 (5), 3355–3360. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2017.6381.
Flakus, F.N., 1982. Detecting and measuring ionizing radiation - a short history. IAEA
N.J. AbuAlRoos, et al.
Bull. 23 (4), 31–36. Available at: https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/
publications/magazines/bulletin/bull23-4/23405043136.pdf, Accessed date: 10
October 2017.
Gaikwad, D.K., et al., 2018. Gamma ray shielding properties of TeO2-ZnF2-As2O3-Sm2O3
glasses. J. Alloys Comp. 765 (2018), 451–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.
2018.06.240. Elsevier B.V.
Healey, N., Nations, U., Control, D., 2009. Lead toxicity, vulnerable subpopulations and
emergency preparedness. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 134 (3), 143–151.
Heath, L.M., et al., 2003. Toxicity of environmental lead and the Influence of Intestinal
absorption in children. Rev. Environ. Health 18 (4), 231–250.
Hengstler, J.G., et al., 2003. Occupational exposure to heavy metals : DNA damage in-
duction and DNA repair inhibition prove co-exposures to cadmium , cobalt and lead
as more dangerous than hitherto expected. Carcinogenesis 24 (1), 63–73.
Hsiao, C., Wu, K., Wan, K., 2011. Effects of environmental lead exposure on T-helper cell-
specific cytokines in children. J. Immunotoxicol. 8 (10), 284–287. https://doi.org/
10.3109/1547691X.2011.592162.
Hulbert, S.M., Carlson, K.A., 2009. Is lead dust within nuclear medicine departments a
hazard to pediatric patients? J. Nucl. Med. Technol. 37 (3), 170–172. https://doi.org/
10.2967/jnmt.109.062281.
Kaundal, R.S., 2016. Comparative study of radiation shielding parameters for bismuth
borate glasses. Mater. Res. 19 (4), 776–780. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-5373-
MR-2016-0040.
Kaur, P., Singh, K.J., Thakur, S., 2018. Evaluation of the gamma radiation shielding
parameters of bismuth modified quaternary glass system. AIP Conference
Proceedings 1953 (1), 090031. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5032878.
Kaur, T., Sharma, J., Singh, T., 2019. Progress in Nuclear Energy Review on scope of
metallic alloys in gamma rays shield designing. Prog. Nucl. Energy 113 (Elsevier),
95–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2019.01.016. January.
Keddy, R.J., Nam, T.L., 2015. Carbohydrate based materials for gamma radiation
shielding. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 611 (1), 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/
611/1/012015.
Khan, D.A., et al., 2010. Lead exposure and its adverse health effects among occupational
worker's children. Toxicol. Ind. Health 26 (8), 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0748233710373085.
Klein, L.W., et al., 2009. Occupational health hazards in the interventional laboratory:
time for a safer environment. Radiology 250 (2), 538–544.
Kumar, A., 2017. Gamma ray shielding properties of PbO-Li2O- B2O3 glasses. Radiat.
Phys. Chem. 136 (7), 50–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2017.03.023.
Kurudirek, M., et al., 2018. Effect of Bi2O3 on gamma ray shielding and structural
properties of borosilicate glasses recycled from high pressure sodium lamp glass. J.
Alloys .Comp. 745, 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.02.158.
Elsevier B.V.May.
Luković, J., et al., 2015. Synthesis and characterization of tungsten carbide fine powders.
Ceram. Int. 41 (1), 1271–1277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2014.09.057.
Mahapatra, C.K., Barai, S.V., 2018. Hybrid Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete
with Fly Ash and Colloidal Nano Silica : A Systematic Study. Constr. Build. Mater. 160
(2018), 828–838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.131. Elsevier Ltd.
Mahesh, M., et al., 2015. Best practices for evaluating and tracking protective garments.
J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 12 (5), 531–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2015.02.007.
American College of Radiology.
Mann, H.S., Brar, G.S., Mudahar, G.S., 2016. Gamma-ray shielding effectiveness of novel
light-weight clay-flyash bricks. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 127, 97–101. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.radphyschem.2016.06.013. Elsevier June 2016.
Manual, A., Zeb, J., Rashid, A., 2010. Gamma Shielding by Aluminum. Pak. Inst. Nucl.
Sci. Technol. 219.
Martinez, Timothy P., Cournoyer, M.E., 2001a. Lead Subsititution and Elemination Study,
Part II. Los Alamos National Lab., NM (US), pp. 1 2001.
Martinez, T.P., Cournoyer, M.E., 2001b. Lead substitution and elimination study. J.
Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 249 (2), 397–402.
Materna, B.L., Payne, S.F., Kirsch, L.C., 2004. Family lead poisoning associated with
occupational exposure. Clin. Pediatr. 43 (9), 845–849.
Mcalister, D.R., 2012. Gamma Ray Attenuation Properties of Common Shielding
Materials. PG Research Foundation - University Lane Lisle, USA.
McCaffrey, J.P., et al., 2007. Radiation attenuation by lead and nonlead materials used in
radiation shielding garments. Med. Phys. 34 (2), 530–537. https://doi.org/10.1118/
1.2426404.
Millstone, E., Russell, J., Russell, J., 1995. Lead toxicity and public health policy. J. R.
Soc. Health 115 (6), 347–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/146642409511500603.
Mirji, R., Lobo, B., 2017. Radiation Shielding Materials : A Brief Review on Methods ,
Scope and Significance. National conference on Advances in VLS and
Microelectronics, 27th Januari 2017, P.C. Jabin Science Collecge, Huballi, India,
(June).
Moore, B., Novelline, A., 1992. The relashionship between back pain and lead apron use
in radiologists. AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol. 158 (1), 191–193.
Nambiar, S., Yeow, J.T.W., 2012. Polymer-Composite materials for radiation protection.
ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 4 (11), 5717–5726.
Navas-acien, A., et al., 2007. Lead exposure and cardiovascular disease — a systematic
review. Environ. Health Perspect. 472 (3), 427–428. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.
9785.
Ogawa, M., et al., 2008. Two cases of acute lead poisoning due to occupational exposure
Radiation Physics and Chemistry 165 (2019) 108439
to lead. Clin. Toxicol. 46 (4), 332–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15563650701816448.
Oteiza, P.I., 2008. Aluminium and lead : molecular mechanisms of brain toxicity. Arch.
Toxicol. 82 (11), 789–802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-008-0345-3.
Oto, B., et al., 2015. Investigation of gamma radiation shielding properties of various
ores. Prog. Nucl. Energy 85 (11), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2015.
07.016.
Papanikolaou, N.C., et al., 2005. Lead toxicity update . A brief review. Med. Sci. Monit. 11
(10), 329–336.
Park, S.K., et al., 2008. Air pollution and heart rate variability effect modification by
chronic lead exposure. Epidemiology 19 (1), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.
0b013e31815c408a.
Peterson, D. R. P. Æ. D. S, 2009. Replacement of lead bricks with non-hazardous polymer-
bismuth for low-energy gamma shielding. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 282 (1),
239–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-009-0245-x.
Rudolph, C., et al., 2011. Rudolph's pediatric. In: M Rudolph, A. (Ed.), 22nd ed. .
Şakar, B.C., Kurudirek, M., 2019. Leaded Brass Alloys for Gamma-Ray Shielding appli-
cations. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 159 (6), 64–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
radphyschem.2019.02.042. Elsevier Ltd.
Sayyed, M.I., Kaky, K.M., Şakar, E., et al., 2019a. Gamma radiation shielding investiga-
tions for selected germanate glasses. J. Non-crystalline Solids, vol. 512, 33–40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.02.014. Elsevier February.
Sayyed, M.I., Kaky, K.M., Gaikwad, D.K., et al., 2019b. Physical, structural, optical and
gamma radiation shielding properties of borate glasses containing heavy metals
(Bi2O3/MoO3). J. Non-crystalline Solids, vol. 507, 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jnoncrysol.2018.12.010. Elsevier November 2018.
Singh, K., Rani, A., Singh, M., 2015. Shielding behaviors of some polymer and plastic
materials for gamma-rays. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 106 (1), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.radphyschem.2014.08.005. Elsevier.
Singh, V.P., et al., 2014a. Evaluation of gamma-ray exposure buildup factors and neutron
shielding for bismuth borosilicate glasses. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 98 (5), 14–21. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2013.12.029. Elsevier.
Singh, V.P., Badiger, N.M., Kaewkhao, J., 2014b. Radiation shielding competence of si-
licate and borate heavy metal oxide glasses : comparative study. J. Non-Cryst. Solids
404 (11), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2014.08.003. Elsevier B.V.
Smith, S., et al., 2016. Personnel protective apparel integrity Inspection : where we are
and what we need. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 13 (10), 1223–1226. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jacr.2016.05.006. Am. Coll. Radiol.
Smith, S., et al., 2018. Personnel protective apparel integrity inspection: where we are
and what we need. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 13 (10), 1223–1226. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jacr.2016.05.006. Am. College of Radiology.
Stevenson, S., et al., 2008. Chronic lead exposure in nuclear medicine. Internet J. Nucl.
Med. 5 (1), 1–6.
Taylor, P., et al., 2012. Do new wipe materials outperform traditional lead dust cleaning
methods? J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 9 (8), 524–533. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15459624.2012.695975.
Tekin, H.O., Sayyed, M.I., Issa, S.A.M., 2018. Gamma radiation shielding properties of the
hematite-serpentine concrete blended with WO3 and Bi2O3 micro and nano particles
using MCNPX code. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 150 (9), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
radphyschem.2018.05.002. Elsevier Ltd.
Tekin, H.O., Singh, V.P., Manici, T., 2017. Effects of micro-sized and nano-sized WO3 on
mass attenauation coefficients of concrete by using MCNPX code. Appl. Radiat. Isot.
122 (3), 122–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.12.040. Elsevier.
Tsoulfanidis, N., Landsberger, S., 2015. Measurement and detection of radiation. Edited
by 4.
Vaziri, N.D., 2008. Mechanisms of Lead-Induced Hypertension and Cardiovascular
Disease. Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 295 (2), 454–465. https://doi.org/10.
1152/ajpheart.00158.2008.
Wani, A.L., Ara, A., Usmani, J.A., 2015. Lead toxicity : a review. Interdiscip. Toxicol. 8
(2), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1515/intox-2015-0009.
Webster, E.W., Ph, D., 1966. Experiments with medium Z materials for shielding against
low energy X-rays. Radiology 86 (1), 1966.
Yaffe, M.J., et al., 1991. Composite materials for x-ray protection. Health Phys. 60 (5),
661–664.
Yu, C., Lin, J., 2004. Environmental exposure to lead and progression of chronic renal
diseases : a four-year prospective longitudinal study. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 15 (4),
1016–1022. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASN.0000118529.01681.4F.
Zehtabian, M., et al., 2015. Design of light multi-layered shields for use in diagnostic
radiology and nuclear medicine via MCNP5 Monte Carlo code. Iran. J. Med. Phys. 12
(3), 223–229.
Zhong, W.H., et al., 2009. Cosmic radiation shielding tests for UHMWPE fiber/nano-
epoxy composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 69 (13), 2093–2097. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.compscitech.2008.10.004. Elsevier Ltd.
Zoulfakar, A.M., et al., 2017. Effect of antimony-oxide on the shielding properties of some
sodium-boro-silicate glasses. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 127 (9), 269–274. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apradiso.2017.05.007. Elsevier Ltd.
Zuguchi, M., et al., 2008. Usefulness of non-lead aprons in radiation protection for
physicians performing international procedures. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 131 (4),
531–534.