Operator radiation exposure in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: does biplane angiography increase radiation dose?

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S286-S287 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Murdoch ◽  
J. Crowhurst ◽  
E. Shaw ◽  
R. Saireddy ◽  
O. Raffel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Cardiac Catheterisation ◽  
Increase Radiation Dose ◽  
Biplane Angiography ◽  
Catheterisation Laboratory

Reduction of occupational radiation dose in staff at the cardiac catheterisation laboratory by protective material placed on the patient

2015 ◽  
Vol 165 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 272-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Ordiales ◽  
J. M. Nogales ◽  
R. Sánchez-Casanueva ◽  
E. Vano ◽  
J. M. Fernández ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Cardiac Catheterisation ◽  
Protective Material ◽  
Occupational Radiation ◽  
Catheterisation Laboratory

scholarly journals Understanding and Minimising Occupational Radiation in the Catheterisation Laboratory with PISAX and the ACIST CVi® Contrast Delivery System

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
Olivier Bar ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Delivery System ◽  
Cardiac Catheterisation ◽  
Injection System ◽  
Radiation Shield ◽  
Contrast Injection ◽  
Occupational Radiation ◽  
Catheterisation Laboratory

This paper provides an overview of radiation exposure and its associated risks in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory (cath lab), as well as strategies to minimise radiation exposure for operators, cath lab staff and patients. The benefits of using a mobile 2 mm lead equivalent radiation shield (PISAX) and adoption of an automated contrast injection system (the ACIST CVi® Contrast Delivery System) are discussed, and the potential advantages of their combination are reviewed.

scholarly journals Use of a safe procedure checklist in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. e000074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair C Lindsay ◽  
Jeremy Bishop ◽  
Katie Harron ◽  
Simon Davies ◽  
Elizabeth Haxby
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Turnaround Time ◽  
Cardiac Catheterisation ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Dose Area Product ◽  
Patient Questionnaires ◽  
Team Briefing ◽  
Area Product ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Catheterisation Laboratory

BackgroundThe use of the WHO safe surgery checklist has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality from surgical procedures. However, whether a WHO-style safe procedure checklist can improve safety in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory (CCL) has not previously been investigated.ObjectivesThe authors sought to design and implement a safe procedure checklist suitable for all CCL procedures, and to assess its impact over the course of 1 year.MethodsIn the first 3 months, weekly PDSA cycles (Plan-Do-Study-Act) were used to optimise the design of the checklist through testing and staff feedback, and team briefing sessions were introduced before each procedure list. The impact of the checklist and team briefs was assessed by analysing in-house procedural data subsequently submitted to national audit databases. Staff and patient questionnaires were performed throughout the year.ResultsIntroduction of the checklist was associated with a significant reduction of 3 min in average turnaround time (95% CI 25 s to 6 min, p=0.027). Similarly, an initial reduction in patient radiation exposure was recorded (dose area product reduction of 641.5 cGy/cm2; 95% CI 255.9 to 1027.1, p=0.002). The rate of reported complications from all procedures fell significantly from 2.0% in 2012/2013 (95% CI 1.6% to 2.4%) to 0.8% in 2013/2014 (95% CI 0.6% to 1.1%, p≤0.001). Staff climate questionnaires showed that technicians and radiographers gave more positive responses at the end of the study period compared with the beginning (p=0.001).ConclusionsThe use of a team brief and WHO-derived safe procedure checklist in the CCL was associated with decreased radiation exposure, fewer procedural complications, faster turnarounds and improved staff experience.

scholarly journals Radiation dose survey in a paediatric cardiac catheterisation laboratory equipped with flat-panel detectors

2008 ◽  
Vol 129 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 91-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Dragusin ◽  
M. Gewillig ◽  
W. Desmet ◽  
K. Smans ◽  
L. Struelens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Cardiac Catheterisation ◽  
Flat Panel ◽  
Flat Panel Detectors ◽  
Catheterisation Laboratory

EVALUATION OF OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION EXPOSURE IN A RADIO-DIAGNOSTIC FACILITY IN KATSINA- NIGERIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 722-729
Author(s):  
Usman Sani ◽  
Bashir Gide Muhammad ◽  
Dimas Skam Joseph ◽  
D. Z. Joseph
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Short Exposure ◽  
Skin Dose ◽  
Continuous Training ◽  
Short Exposure Time ◽  
Occupational Dose ◽  
Dose Limits ◽  
Radiation Workers ◽  
Occupational Radiation

Poor implementation of quality assurance programs in the radiation industry has been a major setback in our locality. Several studies revealed that occupational workers are exposed to many potential hazards of ionizing radiation during radio-diagnostic procedures, yet radiation workers are often not monitored. This study aims to evaluate the occupational exposure of the radiation workers in Federal Medical Centre Katsina, and to compare the exposure with recommended occupational radiation dose limits. The quarterly readings of 20 thermo-luminescent dosimeters (TLDs') used by the radiation workers from January to December, 2019 were collected from the facility's radiation monitoring archive, and subsequently assessed and analyzed. The results indicate that the average annual equivalent dose per occupational worker range from 0.74 to 1.20 mSv and 1.28 to 2.21 mSv for skin surface and deep skin dose, measured at 10 mm and 0.07 mm tissue depth respectively. The occupational dose was within the recommended national and international limits of 5 mSv per annum or an average of 20 mSv in 5 years. Therefore, there was no significant radiation exposure to all the occupational workers in the study area. Though, the occupational radiation dose is within recommended limit, this does not eliminate stochastic effect of radiation. The study recommended that the occupational workers should adhere and strictly comply with the principles of radiation protection which includes distance, short exposure time, shielding and proper monitoring of dose limits. Furthermore, continuous training of the radiation workers is advised.

scholarly journals Radiation Dose Reduction in CT Torsion Measurement of the Lower Limb: Introduction of a New Ultra-Low Dose Protocol

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 1209
Author(s):  
Gabriel Keller ◽  
Simon Götz ◽  
Mareen Sarah Kraus ◽  
Leonard Grünwald ◽  
Fabian Springer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Radiation Exposure ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Body Volume ◽  
Reconstruction Algorithms ◽  
Pelvic Radiograph ◽  
Lower Radiation Dose ◽  
Median Total Dose ◽  
Image Reconstruction Algorithms

This study analyzed the radiation exposure of a new ultra-low dose (ULD) protocol compared to a high-quality (HQ) protocol for CT-torsion measurement of the lower limb. The analyzed patients (n = 60) were examined in the period March to October 2019. In total, 30 consecutive patients were examined with the HQ and 30 consecutive patients with the new ULD protocol comprising automatic tube voltage selection, automatic exposure control, and iterative image reconstruction algorithms. Radiation dose parameters as well as the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and diagnostic confidence (DC; rated by two radiologists) were analyzed and potential predictor variables, such as body mass index and body volume, were assessed. The new ULD protocol resulted in significantly lower radiation dose parameters, with a reduction of the median total dose equivalent to 0.17 mSv in the ULD protocol compared to 4.37 mSv in the HQ protocol (p < 0.001). Both groups showed no significant differences in regard to other parameters (p = 0.344–0.923). CNR was 12.2% lower using the new ULD protocol (p = 0.033). DC was rated best by both readers in every HQ CT and in every ULD CT. The new ULD protocol for CT-torsion measurement of the lower limb resulted in a 96% decrease of radiation exposure down to the level of a single pelvic radiograph while maintaining good image quality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document