Literature DB >> 22814780

Radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary angiograms performed by the radial compared with the femoral route.

Gerritjan Kuipers1, Ronak Delewi, Xandra L Velders, Marije M Vis, Rene J van der Schaaf, Karel T Koch, José P S Henriques, Robbert J de Winter, Jan Baan, Jan G P Tijssen, Jan J Piek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare radiation exposure of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and coronary angiograms (CAG) accessed by the femoral route with the radial route (operator's choice).
BACKGROUND: There are limited and contradictory data on the radiation exposure of patients during PCI and CAG performed by the radial route compared with the femoral route.
METHODS: Data on the radiation exposure of patients from 3,973 PCI and CAG procedures between June 22, 2004, and December 31, 2008, were prospectively collected and analyzed. A prediction model was made for radiation exposure (dose-area product in Gy·cm(2)) based upon the femoral access group, and the group of radial performed procedures was compared to assess differences between observed and expected radiation exposure.
RESULTS: Median exposures of patients undergoing a PCI via the femoral route (n = 2,309) was 75 (interquartile range [IQR]: 44 to 135) Gy·cm(2) compared with 72 (IQR: 42 to 134) Gy·cm(2) for radial performed procedures (n = 1,212) (p = 0.30). Median exposure for CAGs was 44 (IQR: 31 to 69) Gy·cm(2) and 40 (IQR: 25 to 65) Gy·cm(2) for, respectively, femoral (n = 314) and radial performed procedures (n = 138), (p = 0.31). Also, the observed radiation exposure in patients undergoing radial PCI or CAGs was not higher than the expected exposure of patients as predicted by the femoral access-based prediction model (71.5 ± 2.3 Gy·cm(2) vs. 79.9 ± 1.8 Gy·cm(2,)).
CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that even after correction for the complexity of the procedures, selected procedures performed by the radial route are not associated with higher radiation exposure of patients than selected procedures performed by the femoral route.
Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22814780     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.03.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  11 in total

1.  Acute myocardial infarction during pregnancy: a clinical checkmate.

Authors:  Abhishek Jaiswal; Mahjabeen Rashid; Mark Balek; Chong Park
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2013-07-12

Review 2.  Vascular access and closure in coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention.

Authors:  Robert A Byrne; Salvatore Cassese; Maryam Linhardt; Adnan Kastrati
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 32.419

3.  Comprehensive assessment of patient image quality and radiation dose in latest generation cardiac x-ray equipment for percutaneous coronary interventions.

Authors:  Amber J Gislason-Lee; Claire Keeble; Daniel Egleston; Josephine Bexon; Stephen M Kengyelics; Andrew G Davies
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-05-02

4.  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

5.  Impact of StentBoost subtract imaging on patient radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Zhigeng Jin; Shengli Yang; Limin Jing; Huiliang Liu
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-03-03       Impact factor: 2.357

6.  Impact of latest generation cardiac interventional X-ray equipment on patient image quality and radiation dose for trans-catheter aortic valve implantations.

Authors:  Amber J Gislason-Lee; Claire Keeble; Christoper J Malkin; Daniel Egleston; Josephine Bexon; Stephen M Kengyelics; Daniel Blackman; Andrew G Davies
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 7.  Transradial approach to cardiovascular interventions: an update.

Authors:  Shilpa Sachdeva; Sibu Saha
Journal:  Int J Angiol       Date:  2014-06

8.  Comparison of safety of radial and femoral approaches for coronary catheterization in interventional cardiology.

Authors:  Wojciech Samul; Anna Turowska; Przemysław Jerzy Kwasiborski; Paweł Kowalczyk; Andrzej Cwetsch
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2015-05-21

9.  Comparison of the patient radiation exposure during coronary angiography and angioplasty procedures using trans-radial and trans-femoral access.

Authors:  Ali Tarighatnia; Amir Hossein Mohammad Alian; Morteza Ghojazadeh; Alir Reza Farajollahi
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Thorac Res       Date:  2016-06-28

10.  Impact of Center Experience on Patient Radiation Exposure During Transradial Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Intervention: A Patient-Level, International, Collaborative, Multi-Center Analysis.

Authors:  Trevor Simard; Benjamin Hibbert; Madhu K Natarajan; Mathew Mercuri; Simon L Hetherington; Robert Wright; Ronak Delewi; Jan J Piek; Ralf Lehmann; Zoltán Ruzsa; Helmut W Lange; Håkan Geijer; Michael Sandborg; Vinay Kansal; Jordan Bernick; Pietro Di Santo; Ali Pourdjabbar; F Daniel Ramirez; Benjamin J W Chow; Aun Yeong Chong; Marino Labinaz; Michel R Le May; Edward R O'Brien; George A Wells; Derek So
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 5.501

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.