Deterministic effects after fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND Endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (EVARs) with fenestrated (FEVAR) stent grafts are high radiation dose cases, yet no skin injuries were found retrospectively in our 61 cases with a mean peak skin dose (PSD) of 6.8 Gy. We hypothesize that skin injury is under-reported. This study examined deterministic effects in FEVARs after procedural changes implemented to detect skin injury. METHODS All FEVARs during a 6-month period with a radiation dose of 5 Gy reference air kerma (RAK; National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements threshold for substantial radiation dose level [SRDL]) were included. Patients were questioned about skin erythema, epilation, and necrosis, with a physical examination of the back completed daily until discharge and then at 2 and 4 weeks and at 3 and 6 months. PSD distributions were calculated with custom software using input data from fluoroscopic machine logs. These calculations have been validated against Gafchromic (Ashland Inc, Covington, Ky) film measurements. Dose was summed for the subset of patients with multiple procedures ≤6 months of the SRDL event, consistent with the joint commission recommendations. RESULTS Twenty-two patients, 21 FEVARs and one embolization, reached an RAK of 5 Gy. The embolization procedure was excluded from review. The average RAK was 7.6 ± 2.0 Gy (range, 5.1-11.4 Gy), with a mean PSD of 4.8 ± 2.0 Gy (range, 2.3-10.4 Gy). Fifty-two percent of patients had multiple endovascular procedures ≤6 months of the SRDL event. The mean RAK for this subset was 10.0 ± 2.9 Gy (range, 5.5-15.1 Gy), with a mean PSD of 6.6 ± 1.9 Gy (range, 3.4-9.4 Gy). One patient died before the first postoperative visit. No radiation skin injuries were found. Putative risk factors for skin injury were evaluated and included smoking (32%), diabetes (14%), cytotoxic drugs (9%), and fair skin type (91%). No other risk factors were present (hyperthyroidism, collagen vascular disorders). CONCLUSIONS Deterministic skin injuries are uncommon after FEVAR, even at high RAK levels, regardless of cumulative dose effects. This study addresses the concern of missed injuries based on the retrospective clinical examination findings that were published in our previous work. Even with more comprehensive postoperative skin examinations and patient questioning, the fact that no skin injuries were found suggests that radiation-induced skin injuries are multifactorial and not solely dose dependent.

[1]  Donald L. Miller,et al.  Clinical radiation management for fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures. , 2010, Radiology.

[2]  S. Walsh,et al.  Ionizing Radiation in Endovascular Interventions , 2008, Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists.

[3]  G. Arbique,et al.  Surgeon education decreases radiation dose in complex endovascular procedures and improves patient safety. , 2013, Journal of vascular surgery.

[4]  G. Arbique,et al.  The Fluoroscopic Sentinel Event: What To Do? , 2014 .

[5]  C. McKinstry,et al.  Absorbed dose and deterministic effects to patients from interventional neuroradiology. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.

[6]  Mahadevappa Mahesh,et al.  Radiation Dose Management for Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Medical Procedures , 2012 .

[7]  J I Ten,et al.  Skin radiation injuries in patients following repeated coronary angioplasty procedures. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[8]  L. Michalis,et al.  Radiation burden of patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. , 2009, Journal of vascular surgery.

[9]  Jeffrey B Guild,et al.  Radiation-induced skin injury after complex endovascular procedures. , 2014, Journal of vascular surgery.

[10]  F. Mettler,et al.  Skin injuries from fluoroscopically guided procedures: part 1, characteristics of radiation injury. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  Stephen Balter,et al.  Comparison of four techniques to estimate radiation dose to skin during angiographic and interventional radiology procedures. , 2002, Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR.

[12]  F. Mettler,et al.  Radiation burns as a severe complication of fluoroscopically guided cardiological interventions. , 2004, Journal of interventional cardiology.

[13]  K. Brown,et al.  Acute and chronic radiation injury. , 2011, Journal of vascular surgery.

[14]  E L Siegel,et al.  Severe skin reactions from interventional fluoroscopy: case report and review of the literature. , 1999, Radiology.

[15]  N Petoussi-Henss,et al.  Calculation of backscatter factors for diagnostic radiology using Monte Carlo methods. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  F. Mettler,et al.  Radiation injuries after fluoroscopic procedures. , 2002, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[17]  C. Fife,et al.  Radiation dermatitis: clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and treatment 2006. , 2006, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[18]  A. Hanlon,et al.  Diabetes mellitus: a predictor for late radiation morbidity. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  F. Mettler,et al.  Skin injuries from fluoroscopically guided procedures: part 2, review of 73 cases and recommendations for minimizing dose delivered to patient. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  Stephen Balter,et al.  Fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures: a review of radiation effects on patients' skin and hair. , 2010, Radiology.

[21]  F. Mettler Medical effects and risks of exposure to ionising radiation , 2012, Journal of Radiological Protection.