Koichi Chida

The correlation between the maximum radiation skin dose with DAP is more striking than that with fluoroscopic time in both RFCA and percutaneous coronary intervention procedures. We recommend that physicians record the DAP when it can be monitored and that physicians record the fluoroscopic time when DAP cannot be monitored for estimating the maximum patient skin dose in RFCA procedures. For estimating the maximum patient skin dose in percutaneous coronary intervention procedures, we also recomm

The annual occupational dose for interventional radiology staff was in the order physicians > nurses > radiologic technologists. The occupational dose determined using one badge under the apron was far lower than the dose obtained with two badges in both physicians and nonphysicians. To evaluate the occupational dose correctly, we recommend use of two monitoring badges to evaluate interventional radiology nurses as well as physicians.

There was a good correlation between the DAP and weight and between DAP and weight-fluoroscopic time product for children who underwent cardiac catheterization or an interventional radiology procedure. Therefore, body weight is important for determining radiation dose to children undergoing cardiac catheterization or an interventional radiology procedure. The normalized DAP (i.e., DAP divided by body weight), fluoroscopy time, and number of cine runs were greater in children who underwent an int

Although the wide acceptance of interventional radiology (IVR) procedures has led to increasing numbers of interventions being performed, the radiation doses from IVR are higher. Increasing numbers of case reports of patient radiation injury resulting from IVR are being published. Therefore, radiation protection during IVR poses a very important problem. To protect against radiation injury, the evaluation of radiation dose is essential. The radiation dose must be evaluated for each IVR x-ray mac

We found that the average entrance doses of cineangiography and fluoroscopy in FPD systems were not significantly different from those in II systems. Hence, FPDs did not inherently reduce the radiation dose, although FPDs possess good detective quantum efficiency. Therefore, to reduce the radiation dose of cardiac interventional radiology systems, even FPD systems, practical measures are necessary.

Physicians and staff are exposed primarily to two sources of scattered radiation: radiation scattered from the patient and radiation from the cover of the x-ray beam collimating device. Those who stand close to the patient and the x-ray beam collimating device, where scattered radiation is higher, have higher radiation doses. Thus, radiation protection during interventional radiology procedures is an important problem.

The maximum dose exceeded the minimum dose by 6.44 times for cineangiography and by 3.42 times for fluoroscopy. The entrance surface dose with acrylic plate was lower with digital-only acquisition (mean +/- SD, 3.07 +/- 0.84 mGy/sec) than with film recording (6.00 +/- 3.04 mGy/sec). By contrast, the entrance surface frame dose, after correction for the cine frame rate, tended to be higher with digital acquisition than with film recording (0.210 +/- 0.053 vs 0.179 +/- 0.058 mGy/frame, respectivel

The new recommendation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection for occupational eye dose is an equivalent dose limit to the eye of 20 mSv year-1, averaged over a 5-year period. This recommendation is a drastic reduction from the previous limit of 150 mSv year-1. Hence, it is important to protect physicians' eyes from X-ray radiation. Particularly in interventional radiology (IVR) procedures, many physicians use protective lead (Pb) glasses to reduce their occupational exposure

Maximum skin dose during PCI is approximately 50% of the total entrance skin dose for each target vessel. Correlation between the two doses was very good. Total entrance skin dose is an effective predictor of maximum skin dose during PCI when the formula used is maximum skin dose = 0.5 x total entrance skin dose. Our results provide useful information for avoiding deterministic radiation skin injury to patients undergoing PCI.

Radiation protection/evaluation during interventional radiology (IVR) poses a very important problem. Although IVR physicians should wear protective aprons, the IVR physician may not tolerate wearing one for long procedures because protective aprons are generally heavy. In fact, orthopedic problems are increasingly reported in IVR physicians due to the strain of wearing heavy protective aprons during IVR. In recent years, non-Pb protective aprons (lighter weight, composite materials) have been d

Pulsed fluoroscopy did not in itself reduce radiation exposure. In general, the use of pulsed fluoroscopy at a pulse rate lower than 25 pulses/sec should reduce the skin dose in fluoroscopically guided intervention procedures. Nevertheless, some X-ray systems are not designed to reduce the dose rate as the number of pulses per second is decreased. Physicians should be aware of the entrance surface dose of the X-ray system that they use for cardiac IVR.