Key result
With dedicated shielding, interventional echocardiographers received lower mean radiation doses to the body (48 vs 99 μSv) and lens (52 vs 222 μSv) than interventional cardiologists.
Why the study?
Does dedicated radiation shielding reduce radiation exposure for interventional echocardiographers compared to interventional cardiologists during structural heart interventions?
Observational (n=32)
Does dedicated radiation shielding reduce radiation exposure for interventional echocardiographers compared to interventional cardiologists during structural heart interventions?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Dedicated radiation shielding effectively reduces body and lens radiation exposure for interventional echocardiographers during structural heart interventions, though hand exposure remains a concern during TEE-guided procedures.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated radioprotective strategies for the interventional echocardiographer (IE) during structural heart interventions in comparison with the interventional cardiologist (IC). BACKGROUND: Structural heart interventions are expanding in complexity with increased reliance on IE. Recent reports have demonstrated concerning exposure and higher radiation to the IE. METHODS: We monitored 32 structural interventions - 19 transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVR), 6 transcatheter mitral valve repairs, 5 paravalvular leak closures, and 2 atrial septal defect closures. Seventeen utilized transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) while 15 used transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Members of the IC and IE teams wore multiple dosimeters on different sites of the body to measure radiation dose to the total body, lens of the eye, and hand. During each case, IE utilized dedicated radiation shielding. RESULTS: Mean doses were higher for the primary IC than the primary IE: IC#1-99, 222, 378; IE#1-48, 52, 416 (body, lens, and hand doses in μSv). IE radioprotective strategies were able to reduce body and lens doses compared to IC during both TTE and TEE-guided procedures. Hand equivalent dose remained higher for the IE driven by exposure during TEE-guided procedures (IC#1 294 vs. IE#1 676 μSv). In a subgroup using radioprotective drapes during TTE-guided TAVR, IC dose was reduced without effect on the IE. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation exposure during structural heart interventions is concerning. With dedicated shielding, IE received lower doses to the body and lens than IC. Further optimization of structural suite design and shielding is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Corrigan et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Structural heart interventions (n=32). Interventional echocardiographer role with dedicated radiation shielding vs. Interventional cardiologist role was evaluated on Radiation dose to the total body, lens of the eye, and hand (μSv). With dedicated shielding, interventional echocardiographers received lower mean radiation doses to the body (48 vs 99 μSv) and lens (52 vs 222 μSv) than interventional cardiologists.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: