Literature DB >> 30057233

Usefulness of Pelvic Radiation Protection Shields During Transfemoral Procedures-Operator and Patient Considerations.

Erez Marcusohn1, Maria Postnikov1, Anees Musallam1, Sergey Yalonetsky1, Snehil Mishra1, Arthur Kerner1, Adva Poliakov1, Ariel Roguin2.   

Abstract

Interventional cardiologists are increasingly exposed to radiation-induced hazards. The MAVIG shield is a lead-free drape and the RADPAD is a sterile, disposable, and lead-free shield, placed on the patient with the aim to minimize operator-received scatter radiation. The objective of the trial was to examine their efficacy in a real-world situation. We randomized 125 patients who underwent coronary procedures from the right femoral artery into 3 groups: Control group (n = 48 [39%]) without additional protection, MAVIG lead shield (n = 38 [30%]) and RADPAD shield (n = 39 [31%]). Multiple radiation dosimeters were used in each case. All 3 groups were with similar baseline and procedural characteristics. Fluoroscopy time and number of views were similar in all 3 study groups. Compared with the standard (no shield) protection [3.5 ± 5.57 mSv], the scatter radiation was reduced by a factor of 5 for the MAVIG group [0.46 ± 1.6 mSv and p = 0.001] and a factor of 4 for the RADPAD group [1.16 ± 2.29 mSv and p = 0.01]. The physician's radiation decreased with the 2 shields, but only the MAVIG shield showed statistically significant lower radiation: 0.49 ± 0.42 mSv in the standard group versus 0.26 ± 0.3 mSv in the MAVIG and 0.35 ± 0.44 mSv in the RADPAD (p = 0.135 for RADPAD and p = 0.005 for MAVIG). Patient's exposure was statistically similar to the control group. Although numerically there was an increase in radiation with the RADPAD and decrease with the MAVIG.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no statistically increase in patient radiation while the operator's radiation exposure was reduced. Decreasing scatter radiation can be done effectively using simple measurements and is of major importance.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30057233     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  6 in total

Review 1.  What are useful methods to reduce occupational radiation exposure among radiological medical workers, especially for interventional radiology personnel?

Authors:  Koichi Chida
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2022-05-24

Review 2.  Radiation protection for the interventional cardiologist: Practical approach and innovations.

Authors:  Alejandro Gutierrez-Barrios; Dolores Cañadas-Pruaño; Inmaculada Noval-Morillas; Livia Gheorghe; Ricardo Zayas-Rueda; German Calle-Perez
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2022-01-26

3.  Efficacy of MAVIG X-Ray Protective Drapes in Reducing CTO Operator Radiation.

Authors:  Keir McCutcheon; Maarten Vanhaverbeke; Jérémie Dabin; Ruben Pauwels; Werner Schoonjans; Walter Desmet; Johan Bennett
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Tungsten-Based Hybrid Composite Shield for Medical Radioisotope Defense.

Authors:  Seon-Chil Kim
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Effect of Different Anthropometric Body Indexes on Radiation Exposure in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Catheterisation and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Youlin Koh; Sara Vogrin; Samer Noaman; Simon Lam; Raymond Pham; Andrew Clark; Leah Biffin; Laura B Hanson; Jason E Bloom; Dion Stub; Angela L Brennan; Christopher Reid; Diem T Dinh; Jeffrey Lefkovits; Nicholas Cox; William Chan
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2022-09-11

6.  Personalized Radiation Attenuating Materials for Gastrointestinal Mucosal Protection.

Authors:  James D Byrne; Cameron C Young; Jacqueline N Chu; Jennifer Pursley; Mu Xian Chen; Adam J Wentworth; Annie Feng; Ameya R Kirtane; Kyla A Remillard; Cindy I Hancox; Mandar S Bhagwat; Nicole Machado; Tiffany Hua; Siddartha M Tamang; Joy E Collins; Keiko Ishida; Alison Hayward; Sarah L Becker; Samantha K Edgington; Jonathan D Schoenfeld; William R Jeck; Chin Hur; Giovanni Traverso
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 16.806

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.