The Patient's Second Hip Fracture - One in Ten.

Introduction The number of fragility hip fractures (>60 years) are estimated to triple/quadruple by 2050. It is estimated that the prevalence of patient's contralateral hip fractures (HF2s) will increase also. Methods Single hospital, Retrospective review, 2013-2017, Radiograph review, n = 822. Results Management of patient's 2nd hip fractures accounted for 10.5% of all hip fracture surgeries. ~50% occurred within 3 years of the 1st hip fracture. There was no statistically significant difference in discharge destination, length-of-stay or mortality between the HF1 and HF2 cohorts. Discussion Patients with HF2s comprised a significant and stable proportion of all hip fractures treated. We advocate for the provision of a Fracture Liaison Service in each of the 16 hip fracture operating hospitals in Ireland to optimise the secondary prevention of hip fractures.

Accuracy of whole-body low-dose multidetector CT (WBLDCT) versus skeletal survey in the detection of myelomatous lesions, and correlation of disease distribution with whole-body MRI (WBMRI).

AIM: The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility of whole-body low-dose computed tomography (WBLDCT) in the diagnosis and staging of multiple myeloma and compare to skeletal survey (SS), using bone marrow biopsy and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WBMRI; where available) as gold standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients referred over an 18-month period for investigation of suspected multiple myeloma or restaging of myeloma were randomized to undergo one of two WBLDCT protocols using high kVp, low mAs technique (140 kVp, 14 mAs; or 140 kVp, 25 mAs). Recent WBMRI scans were reviewed in 23 cases. Each imaging modality was assessed by two radiologists in consensus and scored from 0-3 (0 = normal, 1 = 1-4 lesions, 2 = 5-20 lesions, 3 >or= 20 lesions/diffuse disease) in ten anatomical areas. Overall stage of disease, image quality score, and the degree of confidence of diagnosis were recorded. Diagnostic accuracy of skeletal survey and WBLDCT were determined using a gold standard of bone marrow biopsy and distribution of disease was compared to WBMRI. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were evaluated. WBLDCT identified more osteolytic lesions than skeletal survey with a greater degree of diagnostic confidence and led to restaging in 18 instances (16 upstaged, two downstaged). In those with recent WBMRI, distribution of disease on WBLDCT showed superior correlation with WBMRI when compared with SS. Overall reader impression of stage on WBLDCT showed significant correlation with WBMRI (kappa = 0.454, p < 0.05). WBLDCT provided complementary information to WBMRI in nine patients with normal marrow signal following treatment response, but which were shown to have diffuse residual cortical abnormalities on CT. CONCLUSION: WBLDCT at effective doses lower than previously reported, is superior to SS at detecting osteolytic lesions and at determining overall stage of multiple myeloma, and provides complementary information to WBMRI.

Radiation protection to the eye and thyroid during diagnostic cerebral angiography: a phantom study.

We measured radiation doses to the eye and thyroid during diagnostic cerebral angiography to assess the effectiveness of bismuth and lead shields at dose reduction. Phantom head angiographic studies were performed with bismuth (study 1) and lead shields (study 2). In study 1 (12 phantoms), thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were placed over the eyes and thyroid in three groups: (i) no shields (four phantoms); (ii) anterior bismuth shields (four phantoms) and (iii) anterior and posterior bismuth shields (four phantoms). In a second study (eight phantoms), lead shields were placed over the thyroid only and TLD dose measurements obtained in two groups: (i) no shielding (four phantoms) and (ii) thyroid lead shielding (four phantoms). A standard 4-vessel cerebral angiogram was performed on each phantom. Study 1 (bismuth shields) showed higher doses to the eyes compared with thyroid (mean 13.03 vs 5.98 mSv, P < 0.001) and a higher eye dose on the X-ray tube side. Overall, the use of bismuth shielding did not significantly reduce dose to either eyes or thyroid in the measured TLD positions. In study 2, a significant thyroid dose reduction was found with the use of lead shields (47%, mean 2.46 vs 4.62 mSv, P < 0.001). Considerable doses to the eyes and thyroid highlight the need for increased awareness of patient protection. Eye shielding is impractical and interferes with diagnostic capability. Thyroid lead shielding yields significant protection to the thyroid, is not in the field of view and should be used routinely.

Thyroid dose during neurointerventional procedures: does lead shielding reduce the dose?

PURPOSE: To assess radiation dose to the thyroid in patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures and to evaluate dose reduction to the thyroid by lead shielding. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A randomized patient study was undertaken to evaluate the dose reduction by thyroid lead shields and assess their practicality in a clinical setting. Sixty-five patients attending for endovascular treatment of arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) and aneurysms were randomized into one of 2 groups a) No Thyroid Shield and b) Thyroid Lead Shield. Two thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were placed over the thyroid gland (1 on each side) at constant positions on each patient in both groups. A thyroid lead shield (Pb eq. 0.5 mm) was placed around the neck of patients in the thyroid lead shield group after the neurointerventional radiologist had obtained satisfactory working access above the neck. The total dose-area-product (DAP) value, number and type of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) runs and fluoroscopy time were recorded for all patients. RESULTS: Of the 72 patients who initially attended for neurointerventional procedures, 7 were excluded due to failure to consent or because of procedures involving access to the external carotid circulation. Of the remaining 65 who were randomized, a further 9 were excluded due to; procedureabandonment, unfeasible shield placement or shield interference with the procedure. Patient demographics included mean age of 47.9 yrs (15-74), F:M=1.4:1. Mean fluoroscopy time was 25.9 min. Mean DAP value was 13,134.8 cGy x cm(2) and mean number of DSA runs was 13.4. The mean relative thyroid doses were significantly different (p< 0.001) between the unshielded (7.23 mSv/cGy2 x 105) and shielded groups (3.77 mSv/cGy2 x 105). A mean thyroid dose reduction of 48% was seen in the shielded group versus the unshielded group. CONCLUSION: Considerable doses to the thyroid are incurred during neurointerventional procedures, highlighting the need for increased awareness of patient radiation protection. Thyroid lead shielding yields significant radiation protection, is inexpensive and when not obscuring the field of view, should be used routinely.

Staff radiation doses to the lower extremities in interventional radiology.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the radiation doses to the lower extremities in interventional radiology suites and evaluate the benefit of installation of protective lead shielding. After an alarmingly increased dose to the lower extremity in a preliminary study, nine interventional radiologists wore thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) just above the ankle, over a 4-week period. Two different interventional suites were used with Siemens undercouch fluoroscopy systems. A range of procedures was carried out including angiography, embolization, venous access, drainages, and biopsies. A second identical 4-week study was then performed after the installation of a 0.25-mm lead curtain on the working side of each interventional table. Equivalent doses for all nine radiologists were calculated. One radiologist exceeded the monthly dose limit for a Category B worker (12.5 mSv) for both lower extremities before lead shield placement but not afterward. The averages of both lower extremities showed a statistically significant dose reduction of 64% (p < 0.004) after shield placement. The left lower extremity received a higher dose than the right, 6.49 vs. 4.57 mSv, an increase by a factor of 1.42. Interventional radiology is here to stay but the benefits of interventional radiology should never distract us from the important issue of radiation protection. All possible measures should be taken to optimize working conditions for staff. This study showed a significant lower limb extremity dose reduction with the use of a protective lead curtain. This curtain should be used routinely on all C-arm interventional radiologic equipment.