Literature DB >> 18039722

An investigation into patient and staff doses from X-ray angiography during coronary interventional procedures.

O W E Morrish1, K E Goldstone.   

Abstract

Radiation doses to patients from interventional coronary X-ray procedures are relatively high when compared with conventional radiographic procedures. These high patient doses can translate into high staff doses owing to scattered radiation. This study investigates patient doses by means of dose-area product (DAP) meters installed in six rooms in two hospitals. DAP measurements in each room ranged from 28.0-39.3 Gy cm2 for coronary angiography and from 61.3-92.8 Gy cm2 for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, with the mean effective doses calculated to range between 5.1-6.6 mSv and 11.2-17.0 mSv, respectively. These values are comparable with those found in recent literature. DAP measurements were found to correlate strongly (correlation coefficient of 79%) with patient weight. The non-uniform scatter radiation fields surrounding the irradiated area during coronary angiography were also investigated using a tissue equivalent phantom and an ionization chamber. Exposure rates of scattered radiation from digital acquisition were found to be around 16 times higher than those generated from fluoroscopy, and oblique-angled imaging led to greater amounts of scatter owing to the increase in related exposure factors. The distribution of scatter from oblique projections confirms that X-ray photons in the diagnostic energy range are preferentially scattered backwards, toward the X-ray tube. These concepts are a major consideration when training individuals working in the angiography suite in order to keep doses "as low as reasonably practicable".

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18039722     DOI: 10.1259/bjr/26551424

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


  9 in total

1.  DNA double-strand breaks as potential indicators for the biological effects of ionising radiation exposure from cardiac CT and conventional coronary angiography: a randomised, controlled study.

Authors:  Dominik Geisel; Elke Zimmermann; Matthias Rief; Johannes Greupner; Michael Laule; Fabian Knebel; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Personal dosimetry for interventional operators: when and how should monitoring be done?

Authors:  C J Martin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Impact of biplane versus single-plane imaging on radiation dose, contrast load and procedural time in coronary angioplasty.

Authors:  V Sadick; W Reed; L Collins; N Sadick; R Heard; J Robinson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Towards Robot-Assisted Echocardiographic Monitoring in Catheterization Laboratories : Usability-Centered Manipulator for Transesophageal Echocardiography.

Authors:  Christina Pahl; Henning Ebelt; Mostafa Sayahkarajy; Eko Supriyanto; Amiliana Soesanto
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 5.  Radiation Protection of the Eye Lens in Fluoroscopy-guided Interventional Procedures.

Authors:  Masaaki Akahane; Naoki Yoshioka; Shigeru Kiryu
Journal:  Interv Radiol (Higashimatsuyama)       Date:  2022-07-01

6.  Operator Radiation and the Efficacy of Ceiling-Suspended Lead Screen Shielding during Coronary Angiography: An Anthropomorphic Phantom Study Using Real-Time Dosimeters.

Authors:  Qianjun Jia; Ziman Chen; Xianxian Jiang; Zhenjun Zhao; Meiping Huang; Jiahua Li; Jian Zhuang; Xiaoqing Liu; Tianyu Hu; Wensheng Liang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 7.  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

8.  Comparison of radiation dose exposure in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention vs. peripheral intervention.

Authors:  Salech Arif; Stanislaw Bartus; Tomasz Rakowski; Beata Bobrowska; Joanna Rutka; Anna Zabowka; Tomasz Tokarek; Dariusz Dudek; Jacek Dubiel
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2014-11-17       Impact factor: 1.426

9.  Operator Radiation Exposure in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Guidance.

Authors:  S J Braak; Mjl Strijen van; E Meijer; Jpm Heesewijk van; WPThM Mali
Journal:  J Belg Soc Radiol       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 1.894

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.