BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate radiation exposure during aortic endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) on a mobile C-arm using a low dose and pulse mode. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on patients undergoing EVAR. Indirect dose measurements of dose area product (DAP, mGy m²) calculated by the C-arm (OEC 9900MD), fluoroscopic time (FT), type of procedure, contrast media volume and body mass index were analysed. To confirm the correlation between direct and indirect DAP measurements, direct dose was measured with radiochromic films on a sample of 15 patients. Film grey level response was calibrated according to a reference dose measurement performed with a calibrated dosimeter. DAP and peak skin dose (PSD, Gy) were measured on each film. Correlation between DAP from direct and indirect measures, and between DAP and PSD, were analysed. RESULTS: From January 2009 to April 2011, 335 patients underwent EVAR. Complete data were available on 301 procedures including 188 bifurcated, 54 fenestrated, 28 thoracic, 20 branched and 11 aorto-uni-iliac endografts implantation. The respective median FT and DAP was 9.36 min (1.8-67) and 3 mGy m(2) (0.4-28); 27.2 min (2-69) and 7.3 mGy m(2) (1.2-29); 7.75 min (1.2-19.1) and 2 mGy m(2) (0.3-11); 42.98 min (2.4-95.4) and 15.95 mGy m(2) (2.98-77.7); 6.2 min (0.5-36.3) and 2 mGy m(2) (0.3-11). Direct DAP measurement on radiochromic films was strongly correlated with DAP values provided by the C-arm (r = 0.98). PSD correlated weakly with DAP. DAP was significantly increased (p < 0.001) in patients with a body mass index >30. Contrast media volume was significantly increased in the branched endograft group. CONCLUSION: Indirect DAP values measured by the C-arm are accurate to evaluate radiation exposure. Compared to the literature, our values for standard procedures are significantly decreased by the usage of low dose and pulse mode. DAP for fenestrated and branched procedures was comparable to published DAP values with standard procedures using a regular fluoroscopic mode.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate radiation exposure during aortic endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) on a mobile C-arm using a low dose and pulse mode. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on patients undergoing EVAR. Indirect dose measurements of dose area product (DAP, mGy m²) calculated by the C-arm (OEC 9900MD), fluoroscopic time (FT), type of procedure, contrast media volume and body mass index were analysed. To confirm the correlation between direct and indirect DAP measurements, direct dose was measured with radiochromic films on a sample of 15 patients. Film grey level response was calibrated according to a reference dose measurement performed with a calibrated dosimeter. DAP and peak skin dose (PSD, Gy) were measured on each film. Correlation between DAP from direct and indirect measures, and between DAP and PSD, were analysed. RESULTS: From January 2009 to April 2011, 335 patients underwent EVAR. Complete data were available on 301 procedures including 188 bifurcated, 54 fenestrated, 28 thoracic, 20 branched and 11 aorto-uni-iliac endografts implantation. The respective median FT and DAP was 9.36 min (1.8-67) and 3 mGy m(2) (0.4-28); 27.2 min (2-69) and 7.3 mGy m(2) (1.2-29); 7.75 min (1.2-19.1) and 2 mGy m(2) (0.3-11); 42.98 min (2.4-95.4) and 15.95 mGy m(2) (2.98-77.7); 6.2 min (0.5-36.3) and 2 mGy m(2) (0.3-11). Direct DAP measurement on radiochromic films was strongly correlated with DAP values provided by the C-arm (r = 0.98). PSD correlated weakly with DAP. DAP was significantly increased (p < 0.001) in patients with a body mass index >30. Contrast media volume was significantly increased in the branched endograft group. CONCLUSION: Indirect DAP values measured by the C-arm are accurate to evaluate radiation exposure. Compared to the literature, our values for standard procedures are significantly decreased by the usage of low dose and pulse mode. DAP for fenestrated and branched procedures was comparable to published DAP values with standard procedures using a regular fluoroscopic mode.
Authors: Rui Machado; Vitor Miguel Dias Ferreira; Luis Loureiro; João Gonçalves; Pedro Oliveira; Rui Almeida Journal: Braz J Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2016 Nov-Dec
Authors: E Tuthill; L O'Hora; M O'Donohoe; S Panci; P Gilligan; D Campion; R Trenti; E Fox; D Catania; L Rainford Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael M McNally; Salvatore T Scali; Robert J Feezor; Daniel Neal; Thomas S Huber; Adam W Beck Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Johannes Pfaff; Christian Herweh; Mirko Pham; Silvia Schönenberger; Julian Bösel; Peter A Ringleb; Sabine Heiland; Martin Bendszus; Markus Möhlenbruch Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2015-05-02 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Davide Esposito; Francesco Gonfiantini; Aaron Thomas Fargion; Walter Dorigo; Flavio Villani; Rossella Di Domenico; Sara Speziali; Carlo Pratesi Journal: Ann Surg Treat Res Date: 2020-12-30 Impact factor: 1.859
Authors: Tamer El-Sayed; Ashish S Patel; Jun S Cho; James A Kelly; Francesca E Ludwinski; Prakash Saha; Oliver T Lyons; Alberto Smith; Bijan Modarai Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 39.918