Radiation Exposure of the Operator During Coronary Interventions (from the RADIO Study).

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_22FD42B03447
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Radiation Exposure of the Operator During Coronary Interventions (from the RADIO Study).
Journal
The American journal of cardiology
Author(s)
Kallinikou Z., Puricel S.G., Ryckx N., Togni M., Baeriswyl G., Stauffer J.C., Cook S., Verdun F.R., Goy J.J.
ISSN
1879-1913 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0002-9149
Publication state
Published
Issued date
15/07/2016
Volume
118
Number
2
Pages
188-194
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
We sought to compare operator radiation exposure during procedures using right femoral access (RFA), right radial access (RRA), and left radial access (LRA) during coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Because of an increased incidence of long-term malignancy in interventional cardiologists, operator radiation exposure is of rising concern. This prospective study included all consecutive patients who underwent elective or emergency CA ± PCI from September 2014 to March 2015. The primary end point was operator radiation exposure, quantified as the ratio of operator cumulative dose (CD) and patient radiation reported as dose-area product (DAP) (CD/DAP). Secondary end points included CD, DAP, and fluoroscopy time (FT). Overall 830 procedures (457 CA [55%] and 373 PCI [45%]) were performed, 455 (55%) through RFA, 272 (33%) through RRA, and 103 (12%) through LRA. The CD/DAP was lower in RFA (0.09 μSv/Gycm(2) [0.02 to 0.20]) compared with RRA (0.47 μSv/Gycm(2) [0.25 to 0.75], p <0.001). The LRA showed lower CD/DAP compared with RRA (p <0.001). CD was significantly lower in RFA (3 μSv [1 to 7]) compared with RRA (12 μSv [6 to 29], p <0.001). The LRA showed lower CD compared with RRA (p <0.001). There were no significant differences in DAP among the 3 access sites. FT was similar for the 3 groups (RFA 7 ± 7, RRA 5 ± 5, LRA 6 ± 5 minutes, RFA vs RRA: p = 1, RFA vs LRA: p = 0.16, RRA vs LRA: p = 0.52). In conclusion, the use of RFA during CA ± PCI is associated with significantly lower operator radiation exposure compared with RRA. LRA is associated with significantly lower operator radiation exposure compared with RRA.

Keywords
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
19/01/2017 16:18
Last modification date
20/08/2019 13:00
Usage data