Real-time measurement of radiation exposure to patients during diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous interventional procedures.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to accurately assess the radiation exposure received by patients during cardiac catheterization in a large sample representative of the current state of practice in cardiac angiography. BACKGROUND Radiation exposure to patients and laboratory staff has been recognized as a necessary hazard in coronary angiography. The effects on x-ray exposure of the increased complexity of coronary angiographic procedures and, in particular, the increasing use of coronary artery stenting, have not been adequately addressed in previous studies. METHODS X-ray exposure measurements were performed on a consecutive series of 972 patients undergoing 992 diagnostic and interventional studies in the Mayo Clinic catheterization laboratory within an eight week period in late 1997. Data were acquired from 706 diagnostic procedures and 286 interventional procedures using a real-time exposure measurement system to continuously calculate and record the exposure rate and total exposure, reflecting all parameters relevant to the specific patient and procedure situation. RESULTS The median exposure for all 992 procedures was 41.8 mC/kg (162.1 R); the corresponding values for diagnostic and interventional procedures were 34.9 and 95.6 mC/kg, respectively (135.3 vs. 370.5 R). There were significant differences in the fluoroscopy exposure time between diagnostic and interventional procedures: 4.7 min vs. 21.0 min. Heavier patients (>83 kg) received x-ray exposures at a significantly higher rate than did lighter patients (<83 kg) during both fluoroscopy and cine; 44.9 mC/kg/min (173.9 R/min) vs. 27.9 mC/kg/min (108.3 R/min) for cine exposure rate and 2.3 mC/kg/min (8.8 R/min) vs. 1.5 mC/kg/min (5.8 R/min) for fluoroscopy exposure rate. CONCLUSIONS Changes in practice have led to higher values for patient x-ray radiation exposures during cardiac catheterization procedures. The real-time display and recording of x-ray exposure facilitates the reduction of exposure in the catheterization laboratory.

[1]  B. McParland,et al.  A survey of the radiation exposures received by the staff at two cardiac catheterization laboratories. , 1990, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  D. Leaman,et al.  Operator radiation exposure during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1984, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  W. Walsh,et al.  Modifying fluoroscopic views reduces operator radiation exposure during coronary angioplasty. , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  S. Balter,et al.  Review of radiation safety in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. , 1992, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[5]  L. Renaud A 5-y follow-up of the radiation exposure to in-room personnel during cardiac catheterization. , 1992, Health physics.

[6]  P. C. Johns,et al.  Radiation risk to patients from percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  J. Seibert,et al.  Exposure rates in high-level-control fluoroscopy for image enhancement. , 1991, Radiology.

[8]  J. Brinker Editorial comment: X‐ray‐ted , 1997 .

[9]  F. Rueter Physician and Patient Exposure During Cardiac Catheterization , 1978, Circulation.

[10]  N. Kløw,et al.  Radiation-Induced Skin Injury after Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty , 1996, Acta radiologica.

[11]  M. Mosseri,et al.  Chronic radiodermatitis following cardiac catheterization. , 1996, Archives of dermatology.

[12]  R. Coulden,et al.  Coronary angiography: an analysis of radiographic practice in the UK. , 1993, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  W. Hummel,et al.  Data Analysis on Patient Exposures in Cardiac Angiography , 1995 .

[14]  K. Faulkner,et al.  Radiation doses and somatic risk to patients during cardiac radiological procedures. , 1986, The British journal of radiology.

[15]  W. Rutishauser,et al.  Radiation exposure during diagnostic catheterization and single- and double-vessel percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1987, The American journal of cardiology.

[16]  M A Wondrow,et al.  Effect of pulsed progressive fluoroscopy on reduction of radiation dose in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. , 1990, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  M. Bell,et al.  Does the use of new intracoronary interventional devices prolong radiation exposure in the cardiac catheterization laboratory? , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  S. Balter,et al.  Radiation Exposure to the Operator Performing Cardiac Angiography With U-Arm Systems , 1978, Circulation.

[19]  M. Zorzetto,et al.  Radiation exposure to patients and operators during diagnostic catheterization and coronary angioplasty. , 1997, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[20]  M. Bell,et al.  Balloon angioplasty of chronic total coronary artery occlusions: what does it cost in radiation exposure, time, and materials? , 1992, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[21]  R D Safian,et al.  Radiation exposure to patients undergoing diagnostic and interventional cardiac catheterization procedures. , 1997, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[22]  W J Wajszczuk,et al.  Radiation exposure to patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. , 1987, The American journal of cardiology.

[23]  E. Topol,et al.  Use of radiographic devices by cardiologists , 1995 .

[24]  J. Boone,et al.  Radiation exposure to angiographers under different fluoroscopic imaging conditions. , 1991, Radiology.