A randomized study comparing the use of a pelvic lead shield during trans-radial interventions: Threefold decrease in radiation to the operator but double exposure to the patient

被引:52
作者
Musallam, Anees [1 ]
Volis, Ina [2 ]
Dadaev, Svetlana [1 ]
Abergel, Eitan [1 ]
Soni, Amit [1 ]
Yalonetsky, Sergey [1 ,2 ]
Kerner, Arthur [1 ,2 ]
Roguin, Ariel [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Rambam Med Ctr, Dept Cardiol, Haifa, Israel
[2] Technion Israel Inst Technol, Fac Med, Haifa, Israel
关键词
cardiac catheterization; ionizing radiation; protection; safety; CARDIAC-CATHETERIZATION; CORONARY-ANGIOGRAPHY; FEMORAL ACCESS; ARTERY ACCESS; FOLLOW-UP; CARDIOLOGISTS; BRAIN; REDUCTION; WORKING; CANCER;
D O I
10.1002/ccd.25777
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
ObjectivesTo determine the efficacy of a 0.5-mm lead apron across the patient's abdomen in addition to standard operator protection for the reduction of scatter radiation on operator and patient radiation exposure BackgroundCardiac angiography using the radial access compared to the femoral approach is associated with reduced complication rate and improved patient comfort but has significantly increased radiation dose. Improvements in radiation protection are needed MethodsWe randomly assigned 332 patients undergoing coronary angiography to a group with pelvic lead shielding and a group with standard protection. In each procedure, eight digital dosimeters were used to measure operator radiation dose [under the lead apron, outside the thyroid shield, and at the left side of the head], patient dose at the level of the umbilicus [above and beneath the lead apron], and two on the acrylic shielding and one on the image receptor to measure scattered radiation ResultsBoth groups were similar in BMI, procedures performed, and number of sequences. Usage of lead shielding statistically significantly reduced the radiation dose of the operator at all three sites measured: under lead apron [all in mu Sv]: 0.531.4 vs. 0.17 +/- 0.6, on thyroid collar 5.9 +/- 7.7 vs. 2.9 +/- 3.4, and left side of head 3.3 +/- 3.4 vs. 2.1 +/- 2.2, P<0.001. However the radiation to the patient was doubled from 15.4 +/- 24.1 to 28.9 +/- 81.1, P=0.04 ConclusionsThe use of a pelvic lead shield during radial angiography reduced the operator radiation exposure at multiple measurement sites. However there was an increased exposure to the patient. This balance should be further investigated before the widespread adoption of this method. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:1164 / 1170
页数:7
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]   Somatic DNA damage in interventional cardiologists: a case control study [J].
Andreassi, MG ;
Cioppa, A ;
Botto, N ;
Joksic, G ;
Manfredi, S ;
Federici, C ;
Ostojic, M ;
Rubino, P ;
Picano, E .
FASEB JOURNAL, 2005, 19 (03) :998-+
[2]   Consensus document on the radial approach in percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: position paper by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Working Groups on Acute Cardiac Care** and Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology [J].
Hamon, Martial ;
Pristipino, Christian ;
Di Mario, Carlo ;
Nolan, James ;
Ludwig, Josef ;
Tubaro, Marco ;
Sabate, Manel ;
Mauri-Ferre, Josepa ;
Huber, Kurt ;
Niemelae, Kari ;
Haude, Michael ;
Wijns, William ;
Dudek, Dariusz ;
Fajadet, Jean ;
Kiemeneij, Ferdinand ;
Barbeau, Gerald ;
Saito, Shigeru ;
Jolly, Sanjit ;
Louvard, Yves ;
Patel, Tejas ;
Rao, Sunil V. ;
Reifart, Nicolaus ;
Steg, Philippe Gabriel ;
Valsecchi, Orazio ;
Yang, Yuenjin .
EUROINTERVENTION, 2013, 8 (11) :1242-1251
[3]   Practical ways to reduce radiation dose for patients and staff during device implantations and electrophysiological procedures [J].
Heidbuchel, Hein ;
Wittkampf, Fred H. M. ;
Vano, Eliseo ;
Ernst, Sabine ;
Schilling, Richard ;
Picano, Eugenio ;
Mont, Lluis .
EUROPACE, 2014, 16 (07) :946-964
[4]   Reduction in operator radiation exposure during transradial catheterization and intervention using a simple lead drape [J].
Iqtidar, Ali F. ;
Jeon, Cathy ;
Rothman, Richard ;
Snead, Randall ;
Pyne, Christopher T. .
AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 2013, 165 (03) :293-298
[5]   Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial [J].
Jolly, Sanjit S. ;
Yusuf, Salim ;
Cairns, John ;
Niemela, Kari ;
Xavier, Denis ;
Widimsky, Petr ;
Budaj, Andrzej ;
Niemela, Matti ;
Valentin, Vicent ;
Lewis, Basil S. ;
Avezum, Alvaro ;
Steg, Philippe Gabriel ;
Rao, Sunil V. ;
Gao, Peggy ;
Afzal, Rizwan ;
Joyner, Campbell D. ;
Chrolavicius, Susan ;
Mehta, Shamir R. .
LANCET, 2011, 377 (9775) :1409-1420
[6]   Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials [J].
Jolly, Sanjit S. ;
Amlani, Shoaib ;
Hamon, Martial ;
Yusuf, Salim ;
Mehta, Shamir R. .
AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 2009, 157 (01) :132-140
[7]   Reduction of Operator Radiation Dose by a Pelvic Lead Shield During Cardiac Catheterization by Radial Access Comparison With Femoral Access [J].
Lange, Helmut W. ;
von Boetticher, Heiner .
JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2012, 5 (04) :445-449
[8]  
Limacher MC, 1998, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V31, P892
[9]   Radial Artery Access as a Predictor of Increased Radiation Exposure During a Diagnostic Cardiac Catheterization Procedure [J].
Mercuri, Mathew ;
Mehta, Shamir ;
Xie, Changchun ;
Valettas, Nicholas ;
Velianou, James L. ;
Natarajan, Madhu K. .
JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2011, 4 (03) :347-352
[10]   Efficacy of the RADPAD Protective Drape During Real World Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Procedures [J].
Murphy, John C. ;
Darragh, Karen ;
Walsh, Simon J. ;
Hanratty, Colm G. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2011, 108 (10) :1408-1410