Factors contributing to radiation dose for patients and operators during diagnostic cardiac angiography.

INTRODUCTION: Diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) uses ionising radiation with relatively high doses, which impact on both patients and staff. This study sought to identify which patient and procedural factors impact patient and operator dose the most during CA. METHODS: Patient and procedure related variables impacting on Kerma area product (PKA ) and operator dose (OD) were collected for 16 months. Procedures were separated into 10 different procedure categories. PKA was used for patient dose and OD was measured with an instantly downloadable dosimeter (IDD) - downloaded at the end of each procedure. High and low radiation dose was defined by binary variables based on the 75th percentile of the continuous measures. Univariate and multivariate regression were used to identify predictors. RESULTS: Of 3860 patients included, the IDD was worn for 2591 (61.7%). Obesity (BMI > 30 compared to BMI < 25) was the strongest predictor for both a PKA (odds ratio (OR) = 19.1 (95% CI 13.5-26.9) P < 0.001) and OD (OR = 3.3 (2.4-4.4) P < 0.001) above the 75th percentile. Male gender, biplane imaging, the X-ray unit used, operator experience and procedure type also predicted a high PKA . Radial access, male gender, biplane imaging and procedure type also predicted a high OD. CONCLUSION: Radiation dose during CA is multifactorial and is dependent on patient and procedure related variables. Many factors impact on both PKA and OD but obesity is the strongest predictor for both patients and operators to receive a high radiation dose.

Radiation Exposure of Operators Performing Transesophageal Echocardiography During Percutaneous Structural Cardiac Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiography operators (TEEOP) provide critical imaging support for percutaneous structural cardiac intervention procedures. They stand close to the patient and the associated scattered radiation. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate TEEOP radiation dose during percutaneous structural cardiac intervention. METHODS: Key personnel (TEEOP, anesthetist, primary operator [OP1], and secondary operator) wore instantly downloadable personal dosimeters during procedures requiring TEE support. TEEOP effective dose (E) and E per unit Kerma area product (E/KAP) were calculated. E/KAP was compared with C-arm projections. Additional shielding for TEEOP was implemented, and doses were measured for a further 50 procedures. Multivariate linear regression was performed to investigate independent predictors of radiation dose reduction. RESULTS: In the initial 98 procedures, median TEEOP E was 2.62 µSv (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.95 to 4.76 µSv), similar to OP1 E: 1.91 µSv (IQR: 0.48 to 3.81 µSv) (p = 0.101), but significantly higher than secondary operator E: 0.48 µSv (IQR: 0.00 to 1.91 µSv) (p < 0.001) and anesthetist E: 0.48 µSv (IQR: 0.00 to 1.43 µSv) (p < 0.001). Procedures using predominantly right anterior oblique (RAO) and steep RAO projections were associated with high TEEOP E/KAP (p = 0.041). In a further 50 procedures, with additional TEEOP shielding, TEEOP E was reduced by 82% (2.62 µSv [IQR: 0.95 to 4.76] to 0.48 µSv [IQR: 0.00 to 1.43 µSv] [p < 0.001]). Multivariate regression demonstrated shielding, procedure type, and KAP as independent predictors of TEEOP dose. CONCLUSION: TEE operators are exposed to a radiation dose that is at least as high as that of OP1 during percutaneous cardiac intervention. Doses were higher with procedures using predominantly RAO projections. Radiation doses can be significantly reduced with the use of an additional ceiling-suspended lead shield.