Radiation dose to nurses, cardiologists, and patients during coronary angiography: a comparison of femoral and radial access.
Angiography
Dose optimization
Fluoroscopy
Ionizing radiation
Occupational exposure
Radiation
Scout nurse
Scrub nurse
Journal
European journal of cardiovascular nursing
ISSN: 1873-1953
Titre abrégé: Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101128793
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 06 2022
02 06 2022
Historique:
received:
20
05
2021
revised:
26
08
2021
accepted:
03
10
2021
pubmed:
1
11
2021
medline:
7
6
2022
entrez:
31
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Exposure to radiation during fluoroscopically guided cardiac procedures is a cause for concern for both the patient and staff. This study sought to compare the occupational and patient radiation dose during femoral and radially accessed invasive coronary angiography (CA). Occupational dose (µSv) was measured at the left temple of the cardiologist (n = 17), scrub (n = 27), and circulator nurse (n = 27) during 761 femoral and 671 radially accessed diagnostic coronary angiograms and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures. Patient dose parameters of dose area product (DAP) (Gy.cm2) and air kerma (AK) (Gy) were also measured. Coronary angiography performed via the radial artery is associated with greater mean dose to the cardiologist, with the exception of procedures including only PCI. Results demonstrated that scrub nurses are exposed to higher mean doses than the cardiologist when using femoral access and similar doses during radial cases. Both AK and DAP were associated with a higher average dose for femoral PCI than radial, with DAP being significantly higher. Awareness of factors that increase the dose to staff and patients is vital to inform and improve practice. This study has demonstrated that access route during diagnostic CA and PCI influences both patient and staff dose. Radiation dose to in-room staff other than the fluoroscopic operator should be a focus of future research. In addition, all staff present during X-ray guided procedures should be provided with radiation education and adopt dose minimization strategies to reduce occupational exposures.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Exposure to radiation during fluoroscopically guided cardiac procedures is a cause for concern for both the patient and staff.
AIMS
This study sought to compare the occupational and patient radiation dose during femoral and radially accessed invasive coronary angiography (CA).
METHODS AND RESULTS
Occupational dose (µSv) was measured at the left temple of the cardiologist (n = 17), scrub (n = 27), and circulator nurse (n = 27) during 761 femoral and 671 radially accessed diagnostic coronary angiograms and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures. Patient dose parameters of dose area product (DAP) (Gy.cm2) and air kerma (AK) (Gy) were also measured. Coronary angiography performed via the radial artery is associated with greater mean dose to the cardiologist, with the exception of procedures including only PCI. Results demonstrated that scrub nurses are exposed to higher mean doses than the cardiologist when using femoral access and similar doses during radial cases. Both AK and DAP were associated with a higher average dose for femoral PCI than radial, with DAP being significantly higher.
CONCLUSIONS
Awareness of factors that increase the dose to staff and patients is vital to inform and improve practice. This study has demonstrated that access route during diagnostic CA and PCI influences both patient and staff dose. Radiation dose to in-room staff other than the fluoroscopic operator should be a focus of future research. In addition, all staff present during X-ray guided procedures should be provided with radiation education and adopt dose minimization strategies to reduce occupational exposures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34718509
pii: 6410781
doi: 10.1093/eurjcn/zvab096
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
325-331Informations de copyright
Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.