Literature DB >> 23663872

Defining the radiation "scatter cloud" in the interventional suite.

Omar P Haqqani1, Prakhar K Agarwal, Neil M Halin, Mark D Iafrati.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that fluoroscopic imaging creates radiation fields that are unevenly scattered throughout the endovascular suite. We sought to quantify the radiation dose spectrum at various locations during imaging procedures and to represent this in a clinically useful manner.
METHODS: Digital subtraction imaging (Innova 4100; GE Healthcare, Waukesha, Wisc) of the abdomen and pelvis was performed on a cadaver in anteroposterior, left lateral, and right anterior oblique 45° projections. Radiation exposure was monitored in real time with DoseAware dosimeters (Phillips, Houston, Tex) in eight radial projections at distances of 2, 4, and 6 ft from the center of the imaged field, each at 5-ft heights from the floor. Three to five consecutive data points were collected for each location.
RESULTS: At most positions around the angiographic table, radiation exposure decreased as the distance from the source emitter increased; however, the intensity of the exposure varied dramatically around the axis of imaging. With anteroposterior imaging, the radiation fields have symmetric dumbbell shapes, with maximal exposure perpendicular to the table at the level of the gantry. Peak levels at 4 and 6 ft from the source emitter were 2.4 times and 3.4 times higher, respectively, than predicted based on the inverse square law. Maximal radiation exposure was measured in the typical operator position 2 ft away and perpendicular to the table (4.99 mSv/h). When the gantry was rotated 45° and 90°, the radiation fields shifted, becoming more asymmetric, with increasing radiation doses to 10.9 and 69 mSv/h, respectively, on the side of the emitter. Minimal exposure is experienced along the axis of the table, decreasing with distance from the source (<0.77 mSv/h).
CONCLUSIONS: Quantifiable and reproducible radiation scatter is created during interventional procedures. Radiation doses vary widely around the perimeter of the angiography table and change according to imaging angles. These data are easily visualized using contour plots and scatter three-dimensional mesh plots. Rather than the concentric circles predicted by the inverse square law, these data more closely resemble a "scatter cloud." Knowledge of the actual exposure levels within the endovascular environment may help in mitigating these risks to health care providers.
Copyright © 2013. Published by Mosby, Inc.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23663872     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.01.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  8 in total

Review 1.  Physician and Patient Radiation Exposure During Endovascular Procedures.

Authors:  Andrew M Goldsweig; J Dawn Abbott; Herbert D Aronow
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-02

2.  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

3.  Radiation Awareness for Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the Hybrid Operating Room. An Instant Patient Risk Chart for Daily Practice.

Authors:  Quirina M de Ruiter; Crystel M Gijsberts; Constantijn E Hazenberg; Frans L Moll; Joost A van Herwaarden
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 3.487

4.  DNA damage in lens epithelial cells exposed to occupationally-relevant X-ray doses and role in cataract formation.

Authors:  Ion Udroiu; Antonella Sgura; Agnese Chendi; Lorenzo Lasagni; Marco Bertolini; Federica Fioroni; Vando Piccagli; Antonio Moramarco; Maria Grazia Romano; Luigi Fontana; Daniela D'Alessio; Vicente Bruzzaniti; Antonella Rosi; Sveva Grande; Alessandra Palma; Claudia Giliberti; Mauro Iori; Lorenzo Piergallini; Marco Sumini; Lorenzo Isolan; Giorgio Cucchi; Gaetano Compagnone; Lidia Strigari
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-10       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Improved Radiation Exposure Monitoring of Orthopaedic Residents After Institution of a Personalized Lead Protocol.

Authors:  Patrick A Massey; Mitchell E Myers; Ryan D Guedry; Michael T Lowery; Kevin J Perry; R Shane Barton
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2022-03-21

6.  Real-Time Patient and Staff Radiation Dose Monitoring in IR Practice.

Authors:  Anna M Sailer; Leonie Paulis; Laura Vergoossen; Axel O Kovac; Geert Wijnhoven; Geert Willem H Schurink; Barend Mees; Marco Das; Joachim E Wildberger; Michiel W de Haan; Cécile R L P N Jeukens
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 7.  Occupational radiation exposure to nursing staff during cardiovascular fluoroscopic procedures: A review of the literature.

Authors:  Kelly Wilson-Stewart; Madeleine Shanahan; Davide Fontanarosa; Rob Davidson
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Digital Variance Angiography in Lower-Limb Angiography with Metal Implants.

Authors:  M B Bastian; A M König; S Viniol; M Gyánó; D Szöllősi; I Góg; J P Kiss; S Osvath; K Szigeti; A H Mahnken; R P Thomas
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 2.740

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.