BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the radiation dose to patients and personnel during ERCP procedures. METHODS: Phantom studies were performed to compare dosimetry for two image capture systems and to determine the effectiveness of shielding in reducing stray radiation. Radiation techniques and dosimetry were recorded in 72 patients undergoing ERCP. RESULTS: Phantom studies indicated that increasing fluoroscopy voltage from 75 to 96 kV decreased entrance dose by 50%. Image capture by digital radiography decreased radiation exposure by 66%. Shielding decreased stray radiation exposure by 93%. All patients underwent cholangiography (n = 71) and/or pancreatography (n = 53). The mean number of interventional ERCP procedures performed per patient was 1.8 (range, 0 to 6). The mean measured patient entrance dose was 80 mGy (8 R; range, 0.2 to 73 R); however, the calculated mean entrance dose (based on measured intensifying screen doses) may have been as high as 3000 mGy (30 R; range, 0.8 to 300 R). Measured patient exposure increased with fluoroscopy time (r = 0.9) and with the number of interventions performed (r = 0.3). The mean dose to personnel was estimated at 0.04 mR. CONCLUSIONS: The patient radiation dose depended most on fluoroscopy time. The dose may be lowered by minimizing fluoroscopy time, using higher voltage and lower current for fluoroscopy, and using digital radiography for documentation. Personnel were adequately protected.
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the radiation dose to patients and personnel during ERCP procedures. METHODS: Phantom studies were performed to compare dosimetry for two image capture systems and to determine the effectiveness of shielding in reducing stray radiation. Radiation techniques and dosimetry were recorded in 72 patients undergoing ERCP. RESULTS: Phantom studies indicated that increasing fluoroscopy voltage from 75 to 96 kV decreased entrance dose by 50%. Image capture by digital radiography decreased radiation exposure by 66%. Shielding decreased stray radiation exposure by 93%. All patients underwent cholangiography (n = 71) and/or pancreatography (n = 53). The mean number of interventional ERCP procedures performed per patient was 1.8 (range, 0 to 6). The mean measured patient entrance dose was 80 mGy (8 R; range, 0.2 to 73 R); however, the calculated mean entrance dose (based on measured intensifying screen doses) may have been as high as 3000 mGy (30 R; range, 0.8 to 300 R). Measured patient exposure increased with fluoroscopy time (r = 0.9) and with the number of interventions performed (r = 0.3). The mean dose to personnel was estimated at 0.04 mR. CONCLUSIONS: The patient radiation dose depended most on fluoroscopy time. The dose may be lowered by minimizing fluoroscopy time, using higher voltage and lower current for fluoroscopy, and using digital radiography for documentation. Personnel were adequately protected.
Authors: Kwang Pyo Kim; Donald L Miller; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Stephen Balter; Ruth A Kleinerman; Evgenia Ostroumova; Steven L Simon; Martha S Linet Journal: Health Phys Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: Amer A Alkhatib; Ala A Abdel Jalil; Douglas O Faigel; Rahul Pannala; Michael Crowell; M E Harrison Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-02-04 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Thiruvengadam Muniraj; Harry R Aslanian; Loren Laine; James Farrell; Maria M Ciarleglio; Yanhong Deng; Henry Ho; Priya A Jamidar Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Edward Kim; Mark McLoughlin; Eric C Lam; Jack Amar; Michael Byrne; Jennifer Telford; Robert Enns Journal: Can J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.522
Authors: Toufic Kachaamy; Edwyn Harrison; Rahul Pannala; William Pavlicek; Michael D Crowell; Douglas O Faigel Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742