Occupational radiation exposure from fluoroscopically guided percutaneous transhepatic biliary procedures

Comparison of the One-Time Accuracy of Simulated Freehand and Navigation Simulated Pedicle Screw Insertion

OBJECTIVE

To compare one-time accuracy rate between simulated freehand (SFH) and navigation simulated (NS) pedicle screw insertion, assuming no second chance to correct screws.

METHODS

A simulated, comparative, cross-sectional study was conducted on 69 patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. An intraoperative registration system captured the planned point of entry and trajectory of pedicle screws for both SFH under direct visualization and NS under navigation-aided visualization. Pedicle screw insertion was simulated for each captured image (370 screws) using Surgimap. Rajasekaran's method helped evaluate the point of entry accuracy and trajectory.

RESULTS

Accuracy rate was better for the NS method (97.8%) than for the SFH method (63.8%). Of 370 screws in the SFH group, 134 penetrated the cortex, with 31 resulting in >4 mm penetration. Of 370 screws in the NS group, 8 penetrated the cortex, <4 mm penetration. Of 134 misplaced screws in the SFH group, 64 were due to error in the point of entry, 63 were due to error in the trajectory angle, and 7 were due to both errors. Of 8 errors in the NS group, 7 were due to the point of entry.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative navigation had significantly better one-time accuracy of pedicle screw insertion than freehand insertion and should be used to avoid injury to the pedicle and surrounding tissue from screw reinsertion.

ICRP PUBLICATION 120: Radiological protection in cardiology

Cardiac nuclear medicine, cardiac computed tomography (CT), interventional cardiology procedures, and electrophysiology procedures are increasing in number and account for an important share of patient radiation exposure in medicine. Complex percutaneous coronary interventions and cardiac electrophysiology procedures are associated with high radiation doses. These procedures can result in patient skin doses that are high enough to cause radiation injury and an increased risk of cancer. Treatment of congenital heart disease in children is of particular concern. Additionally, staff(1) in cardiac catheterisation laboratories may receive high doses of radiation if radiological protection tools are not used properly. The Commission provided recommendations for radiological protection during fluoroscopically guided interventions in Publication 85, for radiological protection in CT in Publications 87 and 102, and for training in radiological protection in Publication 113 (ICRP, 2000b,c, 2007a, 2009). This report is focused specifically on cardiology, and brings together information relevant to cardiology from the Commission's published documents. There is emphasis on those imaging procedures and interventions specific to cardiology. The material and recommendations in the current document have been updated to reflect the most recent recommendations of the Commission. This report provides guidance to assist the cardiologist with justification procedures and optimisation of protection in cardiac CT studies, cardiac nuclear medicine studies, and fluoroscopically guided cardiac interventions. It includes discussions of the biological effects of radiation, principles of radiological protection, protection of staff during fluoroscopically guided interventions, radiological protection training, and establishment of a quality assurance programme for cardiac imaging and intervention. As tissue injury, principally skin injury, is a risk for fluoroscopically guided interventions, particular attention is devoted to clinical examples of radiation-related skin injuries from cardiac interventions, methods to reduce patient radiation dose, training recommendations, and quality assurance programmes for interventional fluoroscopy.

Occupational radiation doses to operators performing fluoroscopically-guided procedures

In the past 30 y, the numbers and types of fluoroscopically-guided (FG) procedures have increased dramatically. The objective of the present study is to provide estimated radiation doses to physician specialists, other than cardiologists, who perform FG procedures. The authors searched Medline to identify English-language journal articles reporting radiation exposures to these physicians. They then identified several primarily therapeutic FG procedures that met specific criteria: well-defined procedures for which there were at least five published reports of estimated radiation doses to the operator, procedures performed frequently in current medical practice, and inclusion of physicians from multiple medical specialties. These procedures were percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), vertebroplasty, orthopedic extremity nailing for treatment of fractures, biliary tract procedures, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation (TIPS), head/neck endovascular therapeutic procedures, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Radiation doses and other associated data were abstracted, and effective dose to operators was estimated. Operators received estimated doses per patient procedure equivalent to doses received by interventional cardiologists. The estimated effective dose per case ranged from 1.7-56 μSv for PCNL, 0.1-101 μSv for vertebroplasty, 2.5-88 μSv for orthopedic extremity nailing, 2.0-46 μSv for biliary tract procedures, 2.5-74 μSv for TIPS, 1.8-53 μSv for head/neck endovascular therapeutic procedures, and 0.2-49 μSv for ERCP. Overall, mean operator radiation dose per case measured over personal protective devices at different anatomic sites on the head and body ranged from 19-800 (median = 113) μSv at eye level, 6-1,180 (median = 75) μSv at the neck, and 2-1,600 (median = 302) μSv at the trunk. Operators' hands often received greater doses than the eyes, neck, or trunk. Large variations in operator doses suggest that optimizing procedure protocols and proper use of protective devices and shields might reduce occupational radiation dose substantially.