Literature DB >> 25618164

How Slow Can We Go? 4 Frames Per Second (fps) Versus 7.5 fps Fluoroscopy for Atrial Septal Defects (ASDs) Device Closure.

Gurumurthy Hiremath1, Jeffery Meadows, Phillip Moore.   

Abstract

Radiation exposure remains a significant concern for ASD device closure. In an effort to reduce radiation exposure, the default fluoroscopy frame rate in our Siemens biplane pediatric catheterization laboratory was reduced to 4 fps in November 2013 from an earlier 7.5 fps fluoro rate. This study aims to evaluate the components contributing to total radiation exposure and compare the procedural success and radiation exposure during ASD device closure using 4 versus 7.5 fps fluoroscopy rates. Twenty ASD device closures performed using 4 fps fluoro rate were weight-matched to 20 ASD closure procedures using 7.5 fps fluoro rate. Baseline characteristics, procedure times and case times were similar in the two groups. Device closure was successful in all but one case in the 4 fps group. The dose area product (DAP), normalized DAP to body weight, total radiation time and fluoro time were lower in the 4 fps group but not statistically different than the 7.5 fps. The number of cine images and cine times were identical in both groups. Fluoroscopy and cineangiography contributed equally to radiation exposure. Fluoroscopy at 4 fps can be safe and effective for ASD device closure in children and adults. There was no increase in procedure time, cine time, fluoro time or complications at this slow fluoro rate. There was a trend toward decreased radiation exposure as measured by indexed DAP although not statistically significant in this small study. Further study with multiple operators using 4 fps fluoroscopy for simple interventional procedures is recommended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25618164     DOI: 10.1007/s00246-015-1122-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol        ISSN: 0172-0643            Impact factor:   1.655


  12 in total

Review 1.  2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions expert consensus document on cardiac catheterization laboratory standards update: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus documents developed in collaboration with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and Society for Vascular Medicine.

Authors:  Thomas M Bashore; Stephen Balter; Ana Barac; John G Byrne; Jeffrey J Cavendish; Charles E Chambers; James Bernard Hermiller; Scott Kinlay; Joel S Landzberg; Warren K Laskey; Charles R McKay; Julie M Miller; David J Moliterno; John W M Moore; Sandra M Oliver-McNeil; Jeffrey J Popma; Carl L Tommaso
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Measures to reduce radiation in a modern cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Authors:  Shikhar Agarwal; Akhil Parashar; Stephen G Ellis; Frederick A Heupler; Evan Lau; E Murat Tuzcu; Samir R Kapadia
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 6.546

3.  Comparison of results and complications of surgical and Amplatzer device closure of atrial septal defects.

Authors:  F Berger; M Vogel; V Alexi-Meskishvili; P E Lange
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.209

4.  Patient radiation exposure in a modern, large-volume, pediatric cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Authors:  Andrew C Glatz; Akash Patel; Xiaowei Zhu; Yoav Dori; Brian D Hanna; Matthew J Gillespie; Jonathan J Rome
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 1.655

5.  Radiation dose to the pediatric cardiac catheterization and intervention patient.

Authors:  Koichi Chida; Tadayuki Ohno; Shuhei Kakizaki; Mika Takegawa; Hiroko Yuuki; Mitsuru Nakada; Shoki Takahashi; Masayuki Zuguchi
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Cardiac catheterization and long-term chromosomal damage in children with congenital heart disease.

Authors:  Maria Grazia Andreassi; Lamia Ait-Ali; Nicoletta Botto; Samantha Manfredi; Gaetano Mottola; Eugenio Picano
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2006-05-22       Impact factor: 29.983

7.  Characterization of radiation exposure and effect of a radiation monitoring policy in a large volume pediatric cardiac catheterization lab.

Authors:  George R Verghese; Doff B McElhinney; Keith J Strauss; Lisa Bergersen
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Radiation risk to children from computed tomography.

Authors:  Alan S Brody; Donald P Frush; Walter Huda; Robert L Brent
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Community use of the amplatzer atrial septal defect occluder: results of the multicenter MAGIC atrial septal defect study.

Authors:  Allen D Everett; Jacky Jennings; Erica Sibinga; Carl Owada; D Scott Lim; John Cheatham; Ralf Holzer; Jeremy Ringewald; Rani Bandisode; Richard Ringel
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 1.655

Review 10.  The ALARA concept in pediatric cardiac catheterization: techniques and tactics for managing radiation dose.

Authors:  Henri Justino
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2006-09
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Radiation Exposure in Pediatric Interventional Procedures.

Authors:  Agapi Ploussi; Elias Brountzos; Spyridon Rammos; Sotiria Apostolopoulou; Efstathios P Efstathopoulos
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 2.740

2.  Interpreting Quality Improvement When Introducing New Technology: A Collaborative Experience in ASD Device Closures.

Authors:  Mary J Yeh; Lauren Shirley; David T Balzer; Brian A Boe; Howaida El-Said; Susan Foerster; Kimberlee Gauvreau; Todd M Gudausky; Michael R Hainstock; Nicola Maschietto; George T Nicholson; Brian P Quinn; Shabana Shahanavaz; Sara Trucco; Wendy Whiteside; Lisa Bergersen
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2021-11-07       Impact factor: 1.655

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.