Elyne N Kahn1, Joseph J Gemmete2, Neeraj Chaudhary3, Byron Gregory Thompson2, Kevin Chen1, Emmanuel G Christodoulou4, Aditya S Pandey3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Department of Otolaryngology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurointerventional procedures represent a significant source of ionizing radiation. We sought to assess the effect during neurointerventional procedures of varying default rates of radiation dose in fluoroscopy (F) and image acquisition (IA) modes, and frame rates during cine acquisition (CINE) on total X-ray dose, acquisition exposures, fluoroscopy time, and complications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed procedures performed with two radiation dose and CINE settings: a factory setting dose cohort (30 patients, F 45 nGy/pulse, IA 3.6 μGy/pulse, factory CINE frame rate) and a reduced dose cohort (30 patients, F 32 nGy/pulse, IA 1.2 μGy/pulse, with a decreased CINE frame rate). Total radiation dose, dose area product, number of acquisition exposures, fluoroscopy time, and complications were compared between the groups. Means comparisons (t tests) were employed to evaluate differences in the outcome variables between the two groups. p Value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The reduced dose cohort had a significant reduction in mean radiation dose (factory, 3650 mGy; reduced, 1650 mGy; p=0.005) and dose area product (factory, 34 700 μGy×m(2); reduced, 15 000 μGy×m(2); p=0.02). There were no significant differences between cohorts in acquisition exposure (p=0.73), fluoroscopy time (p=0.45), or complications. CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions in radiation dose delivered by neurointerventional procedures can be achieved through simple modifications of default radiation dose in F and IA and frame rate during CINE without an increase in procedural complexity (fluoroscopy time) or rate of complications. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
BACKGROUND: Neurointerventional procedures represent a significant source of ionizing radiation. We sought to assess the effect during neurointerventional procedures of varying default rates of radiation dose in fluoroscopy (F) and image acquisition (IA) modes, and frame rates during cine acquisition (CINE) on total X-ray dose, acquisition exposures, fluoroscopy time, and complications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed procedures performed with two radiation dose and CINE settings: a factory setting dose cohort (30 patients, F 45 nGy/pulse, IA 3.6 μGy/pulse, factory CINE frame rate) and a reduced dose cohort (30 patients, F 32 nGy/pulse, IA 1.2 μGy/pulse, with a decreased CINE frame rate). Total radiation dose, dose area product, number of acquisition exposures, fluoroscopy time, and complications were compared between the groups. Means comparisons (t tests) were employed to evaluate differences in the outcome variables between the two groups. p Value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The reduced dose cohort had a significant reduction in mean radiation dose (factory, 3650 mGy; reduced, 1650 mGy; p=0.005) and dose area product (factory, 34 700 μGy×m(2); reduced, 15 000 μGy×m(2); p=0.02). There were no significant differences between cohorts in acquisition exposure (p=0.73), fluoroscopy time (p=0.45), or complications. CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions in radiation dose delivered by neurointerventional procedures can be achieved through simple modifications of default radiation dose in F and IA and frame rate during CINE without an increase in procedural complexity (fluoroscopy time) or rate of complications. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Emanuele Orrù; Amgad El Mekabaty; Diego San Millan; Monica S Pearl; Philippe Gailloud Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 11.105