Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Realtime Monitoring on Dose Exposure to Staff Within an Interventional Radiology Setting

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to evaluate a new device providing real-time monitoring on radiation exposure during fluoroscopy procedures intending to reduce radiation in an interventional radiology setting.

Materials and Methods

In one interventional suite, a new system providing a real-time radiation dose display and five individual wireless dosimeters were installed. The five dosimeters were worn by the attending, fellow, nurse, technician, and anesthesiologist for every procedure taking place in that suite. During the first 6-week interval the dose display was off (closed phase) and activated thereafter, for a 6-week learning phase (learning phase) and a 10-week open phase (open phase). During these phases, the staff dose and the individual dose for each procedure were recorded from the wireless dosimeter and correlated with the fluoroscopy time. Further subanalysis for dose exposure included diagnostic versus interventional as well as short (<10 min) versus long (>10 min) procedures.

Results

A total of 252 procedures were performed (n = 88 closed phase, n = 50 learning phase, n = 114 open phase). The overall mean staff dose per fluoroscopic minute was 42.79 versus 19.81 µSv/min (p < 0.05) comparing the closed and open phase. Thereby, anesthesiologists were the only individuals attaining a significant dose reduction during open phase 16.9 versus 8.86 µSv/min (p < 0.05). Furthermore, a significant reduction of total staff dose was observed for short 51 % and interventional procedures 45 % (p < 0.05, for both).

Conclusion

A real-time qualitative display of radiation exposure may reduce team radiation dose. The process may take a few weeks during the learning phase but appears sustained, thereafter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sanchez R, Vano E, Fernandez JM, Gallego JJ (2010) Staff radiation doses in a real-time display inside the angiography room. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33(6):1210–1214. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-9945-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vano E, Gonzalez L, Guibelalde E, Fernandez JM, Ten JI (1998) Radiation exposure to medical staff in interventional and cardiac radiology. Br J Radiol 71(849):954–960. doi:10.1259/bjr.71.849.10195011

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartal G, Vano E, Paulo G, Miller DL (2014) Management of patient and staff radiation dose in interventional radiology: current concepts. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 37(2):289–298. doi:10.1007/s00270-013-0685-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kim KP, Miller DL, Balter S, Kleinerman RA, Linet MS, Kwon D et al (2008) Occupational radiation doses to operators performing cardiac catheterization procedures. Health Phys 94(3):211–227. doi:10.1097/01.HP.0000290614.76386.35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jensen K, Zangani L, Martinsen AC, Sandbaek G (2011) Changes in dose-area product, entrance surface dose, and lens dose to the radiologist in a vascular interventional laboratory when an old X-ray system is exchanged with a new system. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 34(4):717–722. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-0017-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Le Heron J, Padovani R, Smith I, Czarwinski R (2010) Radiation protection of medical staff. Eur J Radiol 76(1):20–23. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.06.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miller DL, Vano E, Bartal G, Balter S, Dixon R, Padovani R et al (2010) Occupational radiation protection in interventional radiology: a joint guideline of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe and the Society of Interventional Radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21(5):607–615. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.01.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cuaron JJ, Hirsch AE, Medich DC, Hirsch JA, Rosenstein BS (2011) Introduction to radiation safety and monitoring. J Am Coll Radiol 8(4):259–264. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2010.08.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vano E, Gonzalez L, Fernandez JM, Haskal ZJ (2008) Eye lens exposure to radiation in interventional suites: caution is warranted. Radiology 248(3):945–953. doi:10.1148/radiol.2482071800

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. External Dosimetry: Operational Quantities and their Measurement, 11th International Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) Sess. (May, 2004)

  11. Williams J (2004) Is there a benefit in promoting the concept of radiation risk? Br J Radiol 77(919):545–546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Racadio J, Nachabe R, Carelsen B, Racadio J, Hilvert N, Johnson N et al (2014) Effect of real-time radiation dose feedback on pediatric interventional radiology staff radiation exposure. J Vascul Interv Radiol 25(1):119–126. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2013.08.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Frederic Baumann: no conflict of interest. Barry T. Katzen: member of Advisory Board for Philips. Bart Carelsen: employee of Philips Healthcare who distributes the DoseAware technology. Nicolas Diehm: no conflict of interest. James Benenati: no conflict of interest. Constantino Peña: no conflict of interest.

Statement of Informed Consent

This study focused on the review of data acquired during the quality assessment process. IRB permission for the retrospective use of this HIPAA compliant data was obtained and informed consent was waived.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Miami Cardiac & Vascular Institute (MCVI), Baptist Hospital of Miami, 8900 North Kendall Drive, Miami, FL, 33176, USA

    Frederic Baumann, Barry T. Katzen, James F. Benenati & Constantino S. Peña

  2. Clinical Science Interventional X-ray, Philips HealthCare, P.O. Box 10.000, 5680 DA, Best, The Netherlands

    Bart Carelsen

  3. Clinical and Interventional Angiology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Tellstrasse, 5001, Aarau, Switzerland

    Nicolas Diehm

  4. University of Applied Sciences Furtwangen, Robert-Gerwig-Platz 1, 78120, Furtwangen, Germany

    Nicolas Diehm

Authors
  1. Frederic Baumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barry T. Katzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bart Carelsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicolas Diehm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. James F. Benenati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Constantino S. Peña
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederic Baumann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baumann, F., Katzen, B.T., Carelsen, B. et al. The Effect of Realtime Monitoring on Dose Exposure to Staff Within an Interventional Radiology Setting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 38, 1105–1111 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-015-1075-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-015-1075-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation