Literature DB >> 16110101

Skin dose alarm levels in cardiac angiography procedures: is a single DAP value sufficient?

A Karambatsakidou1, P Tornvall, N Saleh, T Chouliaras, P-O Löfberg, A Fransson.   

Abstract

Maximum estimated skin doses to patients undergoing coronary angiography procedures were obtained using radiographic slow film and diode dosemeters. Conversion factors of maximum entrance skin dose versus dose-area product (MESD/DAP) for diagnostic (coronary angiography (CA); 20 patients; 2 operators) and interventional procedures (percutaneous transluminal coronary angiography (PTCA); 10 patients; 1 operator) were 4.3 (mean value of 10 CA; operator A), 3.5 (mean value of 10 CA; operator B) and 9.7 (mean value of 10 PTCA; operator B) mGy(Gycm2)(-1), respectively. The results emphasise a need for both operator- and procedure-specific conversion factors. Compared with a single, global factor for all cardiac procedures and/or operators that is commonly applied today, such a refinement is expected to improve the accuracy in skin dose estimations from these procedures. Consequently, reference DAP values used in the clinic to define patients who could suffer from a radiation induced skin injury following a cardiac procedure, should be defined for each operator/procedure. The film technique was found to be superior to the diode in defining conversion factors in this study, and allowed for a rapid and accurate estimation of MESD for each patient. With appropriate positioning of the diode, a combined film/diode technique has a potential use in the training of new angiography operators. The patient body mass index (BMI) value was a good indicator of the variation in average lung dose (critical organ) between patients. The highest lung dose/DAP value was obtained for normal sized patients (BMI: 19-26), and was close to 1.5 mGy(Gycm2)(-1) with both CA and PTCA procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16110101     DOI: 10.1259/bjr/14000648

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  7 in total

1.  How to set up and apply reference levels in fluoroscopy at a national level.

Authors:  A Aroua; H Rickli; J-C Stauffer; P Schnyder; P R Trueb; J-F Valley; P Vock; F R Verdun
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-10-27       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Proposal of a new method to prove that unnecessary information is not drawn on the image using statistical analysis.

Authors:  Takaaki Isayama; Sadamitsu Nishihara; Hideki Otsuka
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2019-03-11

3.  An Evaluation of the Organ Dose Received by Cardiologists Arising From Angiography Examinations in Educational Hospital in Rasht.

Authors:  Akram Shoshtary; Jalil Pirayesh Islamian; Mohsen Asadinezhad; Alireza Sadremomtaz
Journal:  Glob J Health Sci       Date:  2015-11-18

Review 4.  Reduction of Radiation Risk to Interventional Cardiologists and Patients during Angiography and Coronary Angioplasty.

Authors:  Mohsen Mohammadi; Leili Danaee; Effat Alizadeh
Journal:  J Tehran Heart Cent       Date:  2017-07

5.  Patient radiation doses in interventional cardiology procedures.

Authors:  Ioannis Pantos; Georgios Patatoukas; Demosthenes G Katritsis; Efstathios Efstathopoulos
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2009-01

6.  Transition from image intensifier to flat panel detector in interventional cardiology: Impact of radiation dose.

Authors:  Roshan S Livingstone; David Chase; Anna Varghese; Paul V George; Oommen K George
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar

7.  Factors Affecting Radiation Exposure during Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection: A Prospective Study in 759 Patients.

Authors:  Suyoung Kim; Joon-Ho Shin; Joon Woo Lee; Heung Sik Kang; Guen Young Lee; Joong Mo Ahn
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 3.500

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.