Literature DB >> 27608938

Meta-analysis of Cumulative Radiation Duration and Dose During EVAR Using Mobile, Fixed, or Fixed/3D Fusion C-Arms.

Quirina M B de Ruiter1, Johannes B Reitsma2, Frans L Moll3, Joost A van Herwaarden3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the total fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure dose during endovascular aortic repairs using mobile, fixed, or fixed C-arms with 3-dimensional image fusion (3D-IF).
METHODS: A systematic search was performed to identify original articles reporting fluoroscopy time (FT) and the kerma area product (KAP) during endovascular aortic repairs. Data were grouped by noncomplex or complex (fenestrated, branched, or chimney) repairs and stratified by type of C-arm. The search identified 27 articles containing 51 study groups (35 noncomplex and 16 complex) that included 3444 patients. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression models were used to calculate the pooled mean estimates of KAP and FT, as well as any effect of equipment or type of intervention. Results are presented with the 95% confidence interval and the statistical heterogeneity (I2).
RESULTS: Within the noncomplex procedure studies, a significant (p<0.001) increase was found in the pooled mean KAP estimate in the fixed C-arm group (181 Gy·cm2, 95% CI 129 to 233; I2=99.7) compared with the mobile C-arm (78 Gy·cm2, 95% CI 59.6 to 97.3; I2=99.6). For complex cases, use of 3D-IF showed a significantly (p<0.001) lower mean KAP (139 Gy·cm2, 95% CI 85 to 191; I2=94%) compared to using fixed C-arms without 3D-IF (487 Gy·cm2, 95% CI 331 to 643; I2=94%).
CONCLUSION: For equivalent fluoroscopy times, the use of a fixed C-arm in noncomplex procedures leads to higher patient radiation doses compared to a mobile C-arm. Complex procedures, which are predominantly performed using fixed C-arms, are associated with the highest radiation dose per intervention. Using fixed C-arms combined with 3D-IF techniques during complex cases might seem an adequate method to compensate for the higher radiation doses measured when a fixed C-arm is used.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3-dimensional imaging; C-arm; digital subtraction angiography; endovascular aneurysm repair; fluoroscopy; fusion imaging; kerma air product; meta-analysis; radiation dose; radiation exposure

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27608938     DOI: 10.1177/1526602816668305

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endovasc Ther        ISSN: 1526-6028            Impact factor:   3.487


  3 in total

1.  Target vessel displacement during fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair and its implications for the role of traditional computed tomography angiography roadmaps.

Authors:  Marloes M Jansen; Merel van der Stelt; Stefan P M Smorenburg; Cornelis H Slump; Joost A van Herwaarden; Constantijn E V B Hazenberg
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-09

2.  Safety and Feasibility of Performing Fenestrated Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair Using a Portable C-arm Without Fusion Technology: A Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Amandeep Juneja; Saqib Zia; Marco H Ayad; Kuldeep Singh; Jonathan Dietch; Jonathan Schor
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-04-20

3.  Image Fusion During Standard and Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair, to Fuse or Not to Fuse? A Meta-analysis and Additional Data From a Single-Center Retrospective Cohort.

Authors:  Sabrina A N Doelare; Stefan P M Smorenburg; Theodorus G van Schaik; Jan D Blankensteijn; Willem Wisselink; Johanna H Nederhoed; Rutger J Lely; Arjan W J Hoksbergen; Kak Khee Yeung
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 3.487

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.