Kevin A Wunderle1, Mina K Chung2, Sripriya Rayadurgam3, Mark A Miller3, Nancy A Obuchowski4, Bruce D Lindsay2. 1. Department of Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, 25900 Science Park Dr., AC211, Beachwood, OH, 44122, USA. wunderk@ccf.org. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Safety, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 4. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Technological advancements have greatly expanded the field of cardiac electrophysiology, requiring greater demands on imaging systems and potentially delivering higher radiation doses to patients and operators. With little contemporary research on occupational and patient radiation risk in the electrophysiology laboratory, the aim of this study was to analyze radiation doses, including occupational fetal doses, over approximately the last decade. We benchmarked the occupational data to our patient radiation dose data to allow for comparison and to put into perspective the associated radiation risks. METHODS: Occupational radiation dosimetry analyzed included data from an 11-year period for physicians, a 7-year period for nurses, and a 9-year period for fetal doses. Patient-related dose metrics over an 8-year period were also analyzed. RESULTS: In the physician and nursing groups, there was a nearly 70% decrease in the average occupational radiation doses over the given periods. Within the electrophysiology department, the average fetal occupational doses were very low, close to 0 μSv. The average reference point air kerma per patient for all electrophysiology procedures decreased from nearly 600 mGy/procedure in 2010 to just over 100 mGy/procedure in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Patient and occupational radiation doses in our laboratories significantly decreased over the periods analyzed as a result of clinical and technical staff efforts as well as advances in imaging technology. The radiation-related risk to individuals working in our electrophysiology laboratories, including pregnant women, is very low. Data reported herein could be used by other institutions to evaluate their occupational and patient radiation safety practices.
PURPOSE: Technological advancements have greatly expanded the field of cardiac electrophysiology, requiring greater demands on imaging systems and potentially delivering higher radiation doses to patients and operators. With little contemporary research on occupational and patient radiation risk in the electrophysiology laboratory, the aim of this study was to analyze radiation doses, including occupational fetal doses, over approximately the last decade. We benchmarked the occupational data to our patient radiation dose data to allow for comparison and to put into perspective the associated radiation risks. METHODS: Occupational radiation dosimetry analyzed included data from an 11-year period for physicians, a 7-year period for nurses, and a 9-year period for fetal doses. Patient-related dose metrics over an 8-year period were also analyzed. RESULTS: In the physician and nursing groups, there was a nearly 70% decrease in the average occupational radiation doses over the given periods. Within the electrophysiology department, the average fetal occupational doses were very low, close to 0 μSv. The average reference point air kerma per patient for all electrophysiology procedures decreased from nearly 600 mGy/procedure in 2010 to just over 100 mGy/procedure in 2017. CONCLUSIONS:Patient and occupational radiation doses in our laboratories significantly decreased over the periods analyzed as a result of clinical and technical staff efforts as well as advances in imaging technology. The radiation-related risk to individuals working in our electrophysiology laboratories, including pregnant women, is very low. Data reported herein could be used by other institutions to evaluate their occupational and patient radiation safety practices.
Authors: Francis R Verdun; François Bochud; François Gundinchet; Abbas Aroua; Pierre Schnyder; Reto Meuli Journal: Radiographics Date: 2008-09-04 Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: John W Hirshfeld; Victor A Ferrari; Frank M Bengel; Lisa Bergersen; Charles E Chambers; Andrew J Einstein; Mark J Eisenberg; Mark A Fogel; Thomas C Gerber; David E Haines; Warren K Laskey; Marian C Limacher; Kenneth J Nichols; Daniel A Pryma; Gilbert L Raff; Geoffrey D Rubin; Donnette Smith; Arthur E Stillman; Suma A Thomas; Thomas T Tsai; Louis K Wagner; L Samuel Wann Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-05-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Hein Heidbuchel; Fred H M Wittkampf; Eliseo Vano; Sabine Ernst; Richard Schilling; Eugenio Picano; Lluis Mont; Pierre Jais; Joseph de Bono; Christopher Piorkowski; Eduardo Saad; Francisco Femenia Journal: Europace Date: 2014-05-02 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Kenneth A Fetterly; Verghese Mathew; Ryan Lennon; Malcolm R Bell; David R Holmes; Charanjit S Rihal Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 11.195