Literature DB >> 16331696

Randomized comparison of operator radiation exposure during coronary angiography and intervention by radial or femoral approach.

Helmut W Lange1, Heiner von Boetticher.   

Abstract

Controversial data have been published on the amount of radiation exposure during radial coronary procedures. We hypothesized that in the current era, high-volume operators with optimal technique would not be exposed to higher radiation doses during radial procedures. A total of 297 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization (195 elective diagnostic coronary angiograms and 102 elective coronary interventions) were prospectively assigned in a random fashion to the radial access (RA) or femoral access (FA). All procedures were performed by the same operator with vast experience in radial procedures and standard measures for radiation protection were used. Operator radiation exposure was measured with an electronic radiation dosimeter attached to the breast pocket of the operator on the outside of the lead apron and estimates of the ambient dose equivalent were derived. For coronary angiograms, fluoroscopy time (2.8 +/- 2.1 vs. 1.7 +/- 1.4 min; P < 0.001) and dose-area product (15.1 +/- 8.4 vs. 13.1 +/- 8.5 Gy x cm(2); P < 0.05) were increased by 18% and 15%, respectively, for RA vs. FA. Operator radiation exposure was 100% higher for the RA compared to the FA (64 +/- 55 vs. 32 +/- 39 microSv; P < 0.001). For coronary interventions, fluoroscopy time (11.4 +/- 8.4 vs. 10.4 +/- 6.8 min; P = NS) and dose-area product (46.3 +/- 28.7 vs. 51.0 +/- 29.4 Gy x cm(2); P = NS) for RA and FA were not statistically different. However, operator radiation exposure was increased by 51% for the RA compared to the FA (166 +/- 188 vs. 110 +/- 115 microSv; P < 0.05). This study demonstrates that the radial approach is burdened with a 100% increase in operator radiation exposure during diagnostic coronary catheterization procedures and a 50% increase during coronary interventions, provided that no special devices for radiation protection are used. Measurements of radiation dose, such as fluoroscopy time and dose-area product, substantially underestimate the disproportionate rise in radiation exposure. Special precautions are warranted to improve radiation protection during invasive coronary procedures via the radial approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16331696     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.20451

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  15 in total

Review 1.  Radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for vascular complications and bleeding.

Authors:  Sandeep Nathan; Sunil V Rao
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 2.  Occupational radiation doses to operators performing fluoroscopically-guided procedures.

Authors:  Kwang Pyo Kim; Donald L Miller; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Stephen Balter; Ruth A Kleinerman; Evgenia Ostroumova; Steven L Simon; Martha S Linet
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.316

3.  Operator radiation exposure during transradial coronary angiography : Effect of single vs. double catheters.

Authors:  A Tarighatnia; L Pourafkari; A Farajollahi; A H Mohammadalian; M Ghojazadeh; N D Nader
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 4.  Minimising radiation exposure to physicians performing fluoroscopically guided cardiac catheterisation procedures: a review.

Authors:  Kwang Pyo Kim; Donald L Miller
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2009-03-27       Impact factor: 0.972

Review 5.  Transcarpal cardiac catheterization.

Authors:  Torsten Schwalm
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 6.  Systematic review and cost-benefit analysis of radial artery access for coronary angiography and intervention.

Authors:  Matthew D Mitchell; Jaekyoung A Hong; Bruce Y Lee; Craig A Umscheid; Sarah M Bartsch; Creighton W Don
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2012-06-26

7.  Randomized comparison of long and short vascular sheaths in reduction of the operator radiation exposure during uterine artery embolization.

Authors:  Meng-Qiu Cao; Xue-Bin Zhang; Zhi-Guo Zhuang; Wei Zhou; Jian-Rong Xu; Yi-Cun Zhong
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention safety before and during the establishment of a transradial program at a teaching hospital.

Authors:  Robert A Leonardi; Jacob C Townsend; D Dirk Bonnema; Chetan A Patel; Michael T Gibbons; Thomas M Todoran; Christopher D Nielsen; Eric R Powers; Daniel H Steinberg
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-01-14       Impact factor: 2.778

9.  Transradial coronary angiography in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Claire Irving; Azfar Zaman; Richard Kirk
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2009-08-11       Impact factor: 1.655

10.  Radiation exposure during coronary angiography via transradial or transfemoral approaches when performed by experienced operators.

Authors:  Binita Shah; Sripal Bangalore; Frederick Feit; Gregory Fernandez; John Coppola; Michael J Attubato; James Slater
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.749

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.