Purpose: To analyze our own data on the dependence of neurological manifestations in liquidators of the Chernobyl accident on the dose within low values and observation time after irradiation. Material and methods: The study was conducted with the participation of 141 liquidators of the consequences of a nuclear power plant accident. The analysis used clinical data on the nosology of neurological manifestations, which are presented in comparison with low radiation doses (31±6 and 190±22 mSv) and observation time after the accident (1986‒1988). The results are statistically substantiated. Results: It was shown that there is no direct relationship between the incidence of neurological disorders and the dose of ionizing radiation within low values. On the contrary, a statistically significant predominance of their number was noted at lower doses – 31±6, relative to 190±22 mSv. The main phenomenology was reduced to neurocirculatory dystonia. The prevalence of vegetative-vascular dystonia and encephalopathy was almost the same during different periods of operation at the Chernobyl NPP and was always statistically significantly lower than the neurocirculatory dystonia. These data were correlated with the type of EEG activity. Conclusion: The effects of low doses of ionizing radiation (31±6 and 190±22 mSv) during various periods of observation (1986‒1988) were characterized by a quantitative predominance of nosological forms in the form of neurocirculatory dystonia. Statistically significant, in a greater percentage of cases they were noted at lower doses (35.7 %, relatively, 18.7 % at higher doses). Analysis of observation periods of the effects of low doses confirms these data and represents the likelihood of their intensification in long-term observation periods: 1986 – 24.4 %, 1988 – 35.7 %, whereas at higher doses these changes were noted only in 1986 – 18.7 %.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Torubarov et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: