PURPOSE: To assess the techniques, indications and radiation exposures incurred with CT fluoroscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 1-year period of use of CT fluoroscopy to guide diagnostic and therapeutic interventional procedures was analyzed. The spectrum of indications, different CT fluoroscopic methods and radiation exposures for the radiologist were assessed. Scatter exposures were measured with and without placement of a lead drape on the patient, with and without use of thin rubber radiation protection gloves. In addition, scattered radiation was determined for a combination of lead drape and radiation protection gloves. RESULTS: There is a wide variety for the use of CT fluoroscopy ranging from diagnostic biopsy procedures to therapeutic interventions such as radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases and CT fluoroscopy-guided osteosynthesis of fractures. Scatter exposure rates to the radiologists hand ranged from 1-320 microSv/case without use of a lead drape and without radiation protection gloves. The lead drape reduced the scattered exposure for the radiologists hand by 72%. Radiation protection gloves reduced scatter radiation by 49%. The combination of both radiation protection devices was most effective in decreasing the dose by 97%. CONCLUSIONS: CT fluoroscopy is a useful targeting method with a wide variety for interventional procedures. However, significant radiation exposures may occur. Therefore, the radiologists should be aware of different techniques of CT fluoroscopy guidance and the methods to reduce scatter radiation.
PURPOSE: To assess the techniques, indications and radiation exposures incurred with CT fluoroscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 1-year period of use of CT fluoroscopy to guide diagnostic and therapeutic interventional procedures was analyzed. The spectrum of indications, different CT fluoroscopic methods and radiation exposures for the radiologist were assessed. Scatter exposures were measured with and without placement of a lead drape on the patient, with and without use of thin rubber radiation protection gloves. In addition, scattered radiation was determined for a combination of lead drape and radiation protection gloves. RESULTS: There is a wide variety for the use of CT fluoroscopy ranging from diagnostic biopsy procedures to therapeutic interventions such as radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases and CT fluoroscopy-guided osteosynthesis of fractures. Scatter exposure rates to the radiologists hand ranged from 1-320 microSv/case without use of a lead drape and without radiation protection gloves. The lead drape reduced the scattered exposure for the radiologists hand by 72%. Radiation protection gloves reduced scatter radiation by 49%. The combination of both radiation protection devices was most effective in decreasing the dose by 97%. CONCLUSIONS: CT fluoroscopy is a useful targeting method with a wide variety for interventional procedures. However, significant radiation exposures may occur. Therefore, the radiologists should be aware of different techniques of CT fluoroscopy guidance and the methods to reduce scatter radiation.