Renaud L. A 5-y follow-up of the radiation exposure to in-room personnel during cardiac catheterization. Health Phys. 1992;62:10-5.
This study documents the radiation doses received by all in-room personnel of three cardiac catheterization laboratories where more than 15,000 cardiac procedures have been performed over a 5-y period. It is shown that all in-room personnel was exposed to a body dose equivalent well below any regulatory limits. However, some workers may have exceeded the occupational 150 mSv y-1 recommended limit for the lens of the eye. The physicians-in-training and the staff physicians are the two groups more likely to reach this limit. It is also demonstrated that a low correlation exists between the annual number of procedures and the annual head dose equivalent of a physician, but more variation is likely to originate from his/her working attitude and techniques. The mean dose equivalent at the collar level of the physicians is estimated to be 0.04 +/- 0.02 mSv per procedure.
Rehani MM, et al. ICRP Publication 117. Radiological Protection In Fluoroscopically Guided Procedures Performed Outside The Imaging Department. Ann ICRP. 2010 Dec;40(6):1-102.
A brief account of the health effects of ionising radiation and protection principles is presented in Section 2. Section 3 deals with general aspects of the protection of workers and patients that are common to all, whereas specific aspects are covered in Section 4 for vascular surgery, urology, orthopaedic surgery, obstetrics and gynaecology, gastroenterology and hepatobiliary system, and anaesthetics and pain management.
Zagorska A, Romanova K, Hristova-Popova J, et al. Eye lens exposure to medical staff during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Phys Med. 2015 Nov;31(7):781-4.
The paper presents a study of the radiation doses to eye lens of medical staff during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures performed in a busy gastroenterology department. For each procedure the dose equivalent to the eye, exposure time, dose rate, Kerma Area Product and fluoroscopy time were recorded. Measurements were performed for a period of two months in four main positions of the operating staff, and then extrapolated to estimate annual doses.
Walters D, Omran J, Patel M, et al. Robotic-Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Concept, Data, and Clinical Application. Interv Cardiol Clin. 2019 Apr;8(2):149-159.
The occupational hazards for interventional cardiologists include the risk of cataracts, malignancy, and orthopedic injury. Robotic technology is now available with the introduction of platforms for performing percutaneous coronary and peripheral interventions. The original remote navigation system has evolved into the current CorPath robotic system, now approved for robotic-assisted cardiovascular interventions. The system removes the operator from the tableside and has been validated for safety, feasibility, and efficacy in coronary and peripheral vascular disease.
Vlastra W, Delewi R, Sjaw K, et al. Efficacy Of The RADPAD Protection Drape In Reducing Operators' Radiation Exposure In The Catheterization Laboratory. Circu Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Nov;10(11):e006058.
The objective of the trial was to examine the RADPAD's efficacy in a real-world situation. The primary outcome was the difference in relative exposure of the primary operator between the RADPAD and NOPAD arms and was defined as the ratio between operator's exposure (E in µSv) and patient exposure (dose area product in mGy·cm2), measured per procedure. A total of 766 consecutive coronary procedures were randomized to the use of RADPAD (N=255), NOPAD (N=255), or SHAMPAD (N=256). The use of RADPAD was associated with a 20% reduction in relative operator exposure compared with that of NOPAD (P=0.01) and a 44% relative exposure reduction compared with the use of a SHAMPAD (P<0.001). Use of the SHAMPAD was associated with a 43% higher relative radiation exposure than procedures with NOPAD (P=0.009).
Vañó E, Miller DL, Dauer L. Implications In Medical Imaging Of The New ICRP Thresholds For Tissue Reactions. Ann ICRP. 2015 Jun;44(1 Suppl): 118-128.
More research is needed to understand the biological effects of cumulative incident air kerma and the instantaneous air kerma rates currently used in medical imaging. The new thresholds, and the need for specific occupational dosimetry related to lens doses, should be considered in radiation protection programmes, and should be included in the education and training of professionals involved in fluoroscopy guided procedures and computed tomography.
Vano E, Kleiman NJ, Duran A, et al. Radiation-Associated Lens Opacities In Catheterization Personnel: Results Of A Survey And Direct Assessments. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Feb;24(2):197-204.
To estimate ocular radiation doses and prevalence of lens opacities in a group of interventional catheterization professionals and offer practical recommendations based on these findings to avoid future lens damage. Posterior subcapsular lens changes characteristic of ionizing radiation exposure were found in 50% of interventional cardiologists and 41% of nurses and technicians compared with findings of similar lens changes in<10% of controls. Estimated cumulative eye doses ranged from 0.1–18.9 Sv. Most lens injuries result after several years of work without eye protection.
van der Marel K, et al. Reduced Patient Radiation Exposure During Neurodiagnostic And Interventional X-Ray Angiography With A New Imaging Platform. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Mar;38(3):442-449.
We evaluated patient doses from an x-ray imaging platform with radiation dose–reduction technology, which combined image noise reduction, motion correction, and contrast-dependent temporal averaging with optimized x-ray exposure settings. A total of 1238 neurointerventional cases were included, of which 914 and 324 were performed on the reference and dose-reduction platforms, respectively. Over all diagnostic and neurointerventional procedures, the cumulative dose-area product was significantly reduced by 53.2% (mean reduction, 160.3 Gy × cm2; P < .0001), fluoroscopy duration was marginally significantly increased (mean increase, 5.2 minutes; P = .0491), and contrast volume was nonsignificantly increased (mean increase, 15.3 mL; P = .1616) with the dose-reduction platform.