Literature DB >> 22059160

Retrospective analysis of radiation exposure during endoscopic retrograde cholagiopancreatography: critical determinants.

Edward Kim1, Mark McLoughlin, Eric C Lam, Jack Amar, Michael Byrne, Jennifer Telford, Robert Enns.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fluoroscopy during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has a logarithmic relationship with radiation exposure, and carries a known risk of radiation exposure to patients and staff. Factors associated with prolonged fluoroscopy duration have not been well delineated.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the specific patient, physician and procedural factors that affect fluoroscopy duration.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 1071 ERCPs performed at two tertiary care referral hospitals over an 18-month period was conducted. Patient, physician and procedural variables were recorded at the time of the procedure.
RESULTS: The mean duration of 969 fluoroscopy procedures was 4.66 min (95% CI 4.38 to 4.93). Multivariable analysis showed that the specific patient factors associated with prolonged fluoroscopy duration included age and diagnosis (both P<0.0001). The endoscopist was found to play an important role in the duration of fluoroscopy (ie, all endoscopists studied had a mean fluoroscopy duration significantly different from the reference endoscopist). In addition, the following procedural variables were found to be significant: number of procedures, basket use, biopsies, papillotomy (all P<0.0001) and use of a tritome (P=0.004). Mean fluoroscopy duration (in minutes) with 95% CIs for different diagnoses were as follows: common bile duct stones (n=443) 5.12 (3.05 to 4.07); benign biliary strictures (n=135) 3.94 (3.26 to 4.63); malignant biliary strictures (n=124) 5.82 (4.80 to 6.85); chronic pancreatitis (n=49) 4.53 (3.44 to 5.63); bile leak (n=26) 3.67 (2.23 to 5.09); and ampullary mass (n=11) 3.88 (1.28 to 6.48). When no pathology was found (n=195), the mean fluoroscopy time was 3.56 min (95% CI 3.05 to 4.07). Comparison using t tests determined that the only two diagnoses for which fluoroscopy duration was significantly different from the reference diagnosis of 'no pathology found' were common bile duct stones (P<0.0001) and malignant strictures (P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Factors that significantly affected fluoroscopy duration included age, diagnosis, endoscopist, and the number and nature of procedures performed. Elderly patients with biliary stones or a malignant stricture were likely to require the longest duration of fluoroscopy. These identified variables may help endoscopists predict which procedures are associated with prolonged fluoroscopy duration so that appropriate precautions can be undertaken.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22059160      PMCID: PMC3206549          DOI: 10.1155/2011/425297

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0835-7900            Impact factor:   3.522


  27 in total

1.  Radiation doses to patients during ERCP.

Authors:  C J Larkin; A Workman; R E Wright; T C Tham
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  Skin injuries from fluoroscopically guided procedures: part 1, characteristics of radiation injury.

Authors:  T R Koenig; D Wolff; F A Mettler; L K Wagner
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 3.  Practical radiation safety and protection for the endoscopist during ERCP.

Authors:  Nicole Campbell; Keith Sparrow; Marielle Fortier; Terry Ponich
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.427

4.  Phantom study to determine radiation exposure to medical personnel involved in ERCP fluoroscopy and its reduction through equipment and behavior modifications.

Authors:  Frederick C Johlin; Retta E Pelsang; Mary Greenleaf
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 10.864

5.  Minimizing radiation-induced skin injury in interventional radiology procedures.

Authors:  Donald L Miller; Stephen Balter; Patrick T Noonan; Jeffrey D Georgia
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Prospective analysis of fluoroscopy duration during ERCP: critical determinants.

Authors:  Edward Kim; Mark McLoughlin; Eric C Lam; Jack Amar; Michael Byrne; Jennifer Telford; Rob Enns
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  Patient and staff exposure during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  N Buls; J Pages; F Mana; M Osteaux
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  A review of factors affecting patient doses for barium enemas and meals.

Authors:  C J Martin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Absorbed doses to patients and personnel from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographic (ERCP) examinations.

Authors:  G Cohen; G J Brodmerkel; S Lynn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Radiation doses to patients from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography examinations and image quality considerations.

Authors:  I A Tsalafoutas; K D Paraskeva; E N Yakoumakis; A E Vassilaki; P N Maniatis; J A Karagiannis; E D Koulentianos
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 0.972

View more
  2 in total

1.  Anatomical Location of Pathology Is Predictive of Prolonged Fluoroscopy Time During ERCP: A Multicenter American Study.

Authors:  Amer A Alkhatib; Ala A Abdel Jalil; Douglas O Faigel; Rahul Pannala; Michael Crowell; M E Harrison
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2015-02-04       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  The radiation environment of anaesthesiologists in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography room.

Authors:  Bora Lee; Min-Soo Kim; Darhae Eum; Kyeong Tae Min
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.