Impact of a lead glass screen on scatter radiation to eyes and hands in interventional cardiologists

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a transparent lead glass screen (TLGS) on scatter radiation to the eyes and the hands in interventional cardiologists and to compare the results to the recommended annual threshold values of 150 and 500 mSv, respectively. Local radiation doses to the left eye and the ring finger of the left hand of three operators (A, B, C) were assessed by thermoluminiscence dosimeters during 813 coronary angiographies (CAs), including 190 ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) either with a TLGS placed between patient and operator [615 CAs including 138 ad hoc PCIs; dose‐area product (DAP) = 84.9 ± 71.3 Gy·cm2], or without (198 CAs including 52 PCIs; DAP = 85.7 ± 61.5 Gy·cm2). To determine the efficacy of the TLGS, average DAP‐normalized local doses were calculated. Using a TLGS, operator A, B, and C performed 259 (in 9 months), 211 (in 8 months), and 145 CAs (in 8 months) with TLGS and acquired cumulative eye lens doses of 5.5, 1.5, and 1.0 mSv corresponding to extrapolated annual doses of 7.3, 2.3, and 1.5 mSv. The cumulative finger doses were 9.6, 10.3, and 6.4 mSv, resulting in extrapolated annual doses of 12.8, 15.5, and 9.6 mSv. Compared to 139 (in 5 months), 36 (in 2 months), and 23 CAs (in 2 months) without TLGS, the use of a TLGS reduced the DAP‐normalized eye dose by a factor of 19 (with TLGS 0.153 vs. without TLGS 2.924 μSv/Gy·cm2), whereas only a weak effect on the dose to the hands was observed (with TLGS 0.504 vs. without TLGS 0.578 μSv/Gy·cm2). The consequent use of a TLGS efficiently reduces scatter radiation to the operator's eyes in daily practice, but has only minimal effects on the dose to the hands. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  S. Jung,et al.  Abschätzung der Strahlenexposition und des Strahlenrisikos für Beschäftigte im Herzkatheterlabor , 1997, Zeitschrift für Kardiologie.

[2]  K. Faulkner,et al.  Patient dose values in a dedicated Greek cardiac centre. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[3]  M. Finkelstein Is brain cancer an occupational disease of cardiologists? , 1998, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[4]  E Vañó,et al.  Radiation exposure to medical staff in interventional and cardiac radiology. , 1998, The British journal of radiology.

[5]  J. Dahm,et al.  Significant reduction of radiation exposure to operator and staff during cardiac interventions by analysis of radiation leakage and improved lead shielding. , 2002, The American journal of cardiology.

[6]  E. Vañó,et al.  Lens injuries induced by occupational exposure in non-optimized interventional radiology laboratories. , 1998, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  A. Dibié,et al.  Factors influencing fluoroscopy time and dose-area product values during ad hoc one-vessel percutaneous coronary angioplasty. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

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

[9]  O. Gefeller,et al.  Standardization of Occupational Dose to Patient DAP Enables Reliable Assessment of Radiation-Protection Devices in Invasive Cardiology , 2003, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[10]  S Balter,et al.  An overview of radiation safety regulatory recommendations and requirements , 1999, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[11]  F Verhaegen,et al.  Correlation of patient skin doses in cardiac interventional radiology with dose-area product. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[12]  A. G. Brennan,et al.  Factors affecting patient radiation exposure during routine coronary angiography in a tertiary referral centre. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  E. Vañó,et al.  Clinical and technical determinants of the complexity of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty procedures: Analysis in relation to radiation exposure parameters , 2000, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

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

[15]  K. Empen,et al.  Identification of less-irradiating tube angulations in invasive cardiology. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  O. Gefeller,et al.  Short communication: time of day influences patient radiation exposure from percutaneous cardiac interventions. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[17]  E. Vano,et al.  Preliminary reference levels in interventional cardiology , 2003, European Radiology.

[18]  J. Dahm,et al.  Effective techniques for reduction of radiation dosage to patients undergoing invasive cardiac procedures. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[19]  J. Dahm,et al.  Radiation exposure benefit of a lead cap in invasive cardiology , 2003, Heart.