The radiation doses and radiation protection on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures

Effect of radioprotective curtain length on the scattered dose rate distribution and endoscopist eye lens dose with an over-couch fluoroscopy system

Sufficient dose reduction may not be achieved if radioprotective curtains are folded. This study aimed to evaluate the scattered dose rate distribution and physician eye lens dose at different curtain lengths. Using an over-couch fluoroscopy system, dH*(10)/dt was measured using a survey meter 150 cm from the floor at 29 positions in the examination room when the curtain lengths were 0% (no curtain), 50%, 75%, and 100%. The absorbed dose rates in the air at the positions of endoscopist and assistant were calculated using a Monte Carlo simulation by varying the curtain length from 0 to 100%. The air kerma was measured by 10 min fluoroscopy using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters at the eye surfaces of the endoscopist phantom and the outside and inside of the radioprotective goggles. At curtain lengths of 50%, 75%, and 100%, the ratios of dH*(10)/dt relative to 0% ranged from 80.8 to 104.1%, 10.5 to 61.0%, and 11.8 to 24.8%, respectively. In the simulation, the absorbed dose rates at the endoscopist's and assistant's positions changed rapidly between 55 and 75% and 65% and 80% of the curtain length, respectively. At the 0%, 50%, 75%, and 100% curtain lengths, the air kerma at the left eye surface of the endoscopist phantom was 237 ± 29, 271 ± 30, 37.7 ± 7.5, and 33.5 ± 6.1 μGy, respectively. Therefore, a curtain length of 75% or greater is required to achieve a sufficient eye lens dose reduction effect at the position of the endoscopist.

Impact of equipment technology on reference levels in fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of equipment technology on reference point air kerma (Ka,r), air kerma-area product (PKA), and fluoroscopic time for fluoroscopically-guided gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures and establish benchmark levels.

METHODS

This retrospective study included the consecutive patients who underwent fluoroscopically-guided gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures from May 2016 to August 2023 at a tertiary care hospital in the U.S. Fluoroscopic systems included (a) Omega CS-50 e-View, (b) GE Precision 500D, and (c) Siemens Cios Alpha. Radiation dose was analyzed for four procedure types of endoscopic retrograde biliary, pancreas, biliary and pancreas combined, and other guidance. Median and 75th percentile values were computed using software package R (version 4.0.5, R Foundation).

RESULTS

This large study analyzed 9,459 gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. Among four procedure types, median Ka,r was 108.8-433.2 mGy (a), 70-272 mGy (b), and 22-55.1 mGy (c). Median PKA was 20.9-49.5 Gy∙cm2 (a), 13.4-39.7 Gy∙cm2 (b), and 8.91-20.9 Gy∙cm2 (c). Median fluoroscopic time was 2.8-8.1 min (a), 3.6-9.2 min (b), and 2.9-9.4 min (c). Their median value ratio (a:b:c) was 8.5:4.8:1 (Ka,r), 2.7:2.1:1 (PKA), and 1.0:1.1:1 (fluoroscopic time). Median value and 75th percentile are presented for Ka,r, PKA, and fluoroscopic time for each procedure type, which can function as benchmark for comparison for dose optimization studies.

CONCLUSION

This study shows manifold variation in doses (Ka,r and PKA) among three fluoroscopic equipment types and provides local reference levels (50th and 75th percentiles) for four gastrointestinal endoscopic procedure types. Besides procedure type, imaging technology should be considered for establishing diagnostic reference level.

SUMMARY

With manifold (2 to 12 times) variation in doses observed in this study among 3 machines, we recommend development of technology-based diagnostic reference levels for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures.

Low-dose pulsed vs standard pulsed fluoroscopy during ERCP to reduce radiation without change in image quality: Prospective randomized study

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) poses the risk of radiation exposure (RE) to patients and staff and increases the risk of adverse biological effects such as cataracts, sterility, and cancer. Newer fluoroscopy equipment (C-Arm) provides options to limit radiation in the form of lower radiation dose and frame rate or time-limited "pulsed" settings. However, the impact of lower settings on image quality has not been assessed, and no standard protocol exists for fluoroscopy settings used during ERCP. Patients and methods This was a single-center, double-blind, prospective randomized study of consecutive adult patients undergoing standard-of-care ERCP at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were randomized into two groups: 1) standard-dose pulsed and 2) low-dose pulsed. Pulsed mode (8 fps) was defined as x-ray exposure either in the manufacturer standard-dose or low-dose settings limited to 3 seconds each time the foot-operated switch was depressed. Results Seventy-eight patients undergoing ERCP were enrolled and randomized. No difference in age, gender, or body mass index was found between the two groups. No significant difference in image quality was found between standard-dose and low-dose fluoroscopy P = 0.925). The low-dose group was exposed to significantly less radiation when compared with standard-dose P < 0.05). Fluoroscopy time (minutes) was similar in both groups (2.0 vs 1.9), further suggesting that group assignment had no impact on image quality or procedure time. Conclusions Low-dose pulsed fluoroscopy is a reliable method that substantially reduces radiation without compromising image quality or affecting procedure or fluoroscopy times. This underscores the need for standardization in ERCP fluoroscopy settings to limit radiation exposure.

Patient Radiation Exposure during Enteroscopy-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Surgically Altered Anatomy (with Video)

BACKGROUND

Fluoroscopy must be used cautiously during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Radiation exposure data in patients with surgically altered anatomy undergoing enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (EA-ERCP) are scarce.

METHODS

34 consecutive EA-ERCP procedures were compared with 68 conventional ERCP (C-ERCP) procedures. Patient and procedure characteristics and radiation data were collected.

RESULTS

Surgical reconstructions were gastrojejunostomy, Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, Roux-en-Y total gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and Whipple's duodenopancreatectomy. Procedures were restricted to biliary indications. Mean fluoroscopy time was comparable in both groups (370 ± 30 s EA-ERCP vs. 393 ± 40 s C-ERCP, p = 0.7074), whereas total mean radiation dose was lower in EA-ERCP (83 ± 6 mGy) compared to C-ERCP (110 ± 11 mGy, p = 0.0491) and dose area product (DAP) was higher in EA-ERCP (2216 ± 173 µGy*m2) compared to C-ERCP (1600 ± 117 µGy*m2, p = 0.0038), as was total procedure time (77 ± 5 min vs. 39 ± 3 min, p < 0.0001). Enteroscope insertion to reach the bile duct during EA-ERCP took 28 ± 4 min, ranging from 4 to 90 min. These results indicate that C-ERCP procedures are generally more complex, needing magnified fluoroscopy, whereas EA-ERCP procedures take more time for enteroscope insertion under wide field fluoroscopic guidance (increased DAP) with less complex ERCP manipulation (lower total radiation dose).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiation exposure during EA-ERCP in surgically altered anatomy is different as compared to C-ERCP. EA-ERCP takes longer with a higher DAP because of the enteroscope insertion, but with lower total radiation dose because these ERCP procedures are usually less complex.

Fundamental study on diagnostic reference level quantities for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography using a C-arm fluoroscopy system

The diagnostic reference level (DRL) is an effective tool for optimising protection in medical exposures to patients. However regarding air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (Ka,r), one of the DRL quantities for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), manufacturers use a variety of the International Electrotechnical Commission and their own specific definitions of the reference point. The research question for this study was whetherKa,ris appropriate as a DRL quantity for ERCP. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference betweenKa,rand air kerma incident on the patient's skin surface (Ka,e) at the different height of the patient couch for a C-arm system. Fluoroscopy and radiography were performed using a C-arm system (Ultimax-i, Canon Medical Systems, Japan) and a over-couch tube system (CUREVISTA Open, Fujifilm Healthcare, Japan).Ka,ewas measured by an ion chamber placed on the entrance surface of the phantom. Kerma-area product (PKA) andKa,rwere measured by a built-inPKAmeter and displayed on the fluoroscopy system.Ka,edecreased whileKa,rincreased as the patient couch moved away from the focal spot. The uncertainty of theKa,e/Ka,rratio due to the different height of the patient couch was estimated to be 75%-94%.Ka,rmay not accurately representKa,e.PKAwas a robust DRL quantity that was independent of the patient couch height. We cautioned against optimising patient doses in ERCP with DRLs set in terms ofKa,rwithout considering the patient couch height of the C-arm system. Therefore, we recommend thatKa,ris an inappropriate DRL quantity in ERCP using the C-arm system.

Occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes and its protection during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

This study aimed to examine occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In this multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study, we collected data regarding occupational radiation exposure to the lens of the eyes during ERCP. We measured radiation exposure of patients and examined its correlation with occupational exposure. In dosimetrically-measured ERCPs (n = 631), the median air kerma at the patient entrance reference point, air kerma-area product, and fluoroscopy time were 49.6 mGy, 13.5 Gycm², and 10.9 min, respectively. The median estimated annual radiation dose to the lens of the eyes was 3.7, 2.2, and 2.4 mSv for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. Glass badge over lead aprons and eye dosimeter results were similar in operators but differed in assistants and nurses. A strong correlation was shown between eye dosimeter measurements and patients' radiation exposure. The shielding rates of the lead glasses were 44.6%, 66.3%, and 51.7% for operators, assistants, and nurses, respectively. This study revealed the actual occupational exposure dose for the lens of the eyes during ERCP and the efficacy of lead glass. Values of radiation exposure to patients can help estimate exposure to the lens of the eyes of medical staff.

Radiation exposure to staff during fluoroscopic endoscopic procedures

Objectives

Fluoroscopically guided procedures utilize ionizing radiation to assist in the diagnosis and treatment of the patient. The use of ionizing radiation is not without risk to the operator and other staff members present during endoscopic procedures. This study simulates radiation exposure during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures under different shielded conditions and provides practical radiation safety recommendations, through easy‐to‐use visual guides.

Methods

We obtained radiation exposure measurements at varying locations with different shielding setups surrounding a mobile C‐arm fluoroscopic unit while imaging a patient equivalent phantom at different heights. Heat maps were generated for the various conditions to provide visual guides for radiation protection.

Results

Different heat maps detailing various shielding methods have been generated to assist in determining the dose rate at varying locations surrounding the patient. The use of appropriate radiation protection could decrease the staff dose by up to 98%.

Conclusion

Although minor per procedure, the magnitude of radiation exposure will accumulate over the staff's working life. As such, it is recommended that precautions be taken during fluoroscopically guided endoscopy procedures to ensure radiation is kept as low as reasonably achievable.

A follow-up questionnaire survey 2022 on radiation protection among 464 medical staff from 34 endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan

Objectives

We surveyed and reported low protective equipment usage and insufficient knowledge among endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments in Japan in 2020. Two years later, we conducted a follow-up survey of doctors, nurses, and technologists in Japan.

Methods

We conducted a questionnaire survey on radiation protection from May to June 2022. The participants were medical staff, including doctors, nurses, and radiological and endoscopy technicians in endoscopy-fluoroscopy departments. The questionnaire included 17 multiple-choice questions divided into three parts: background, equipment, and knowledge.

Results

We surveyed 464 subjects from 34 institutions. There were 267 doctors (58%), 153 nurses (33%), and 44 technologists (9%). The rate of wearing a lead apron was 98% in this study. The rates of wearing a thyroid collar, lead glasses, and radiation dosimeter were 27%, 35%, and 74%, respectively. The trend of the protective equipment rate was similar to that of our previous study; however, radiation dosimetry among doctors was still low at 58%. The percentage of subjects who knew the radiation exposure (REX) dose of each procedure was low at 18%. Seventy-six percent of the subjects attended lectures on radiation protection, and 73% knew about the three principles of radiation protection; however, the concept of diagnostic reference levels was not well known (18%). Approximately 60% of the subjects knew about the exposure dose increasing cancer mortality (63%) and the 5-year lens REX limit (56%).

Conclusions

There was some improvement in radiation protection equipment or education, but relatively little compared to the 2020 survey of endoscopy departments.

Diagnostic Reference Levels for Fluoroscopy-guided Gastrointestinal Procedures in Japan from the REX-GI Study: A Nationwide Multicentre Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) are required to optimize medical exposure. However, data on DRLs for interventional fluoroscopic procedures are lacking, especially in gastroenterology. This study aimed to prospectively collect currently used radiation doses and help establish national DRLs for fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures in Japan.

METHODS

This multicentre, prospective, observational study collected actual radiation dose data from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE), enteral metallic stent placement, and enteral tube placement from May 2019 to December 2020. The study outcomes were fluoroscopy time (FT: min), air kerma at the patient entrance reference point (Ka,r: mGy), air kerma area product (PKA: Gycm2), and radiation dose rate (RDR: mGy/min). Additionally, the basic settings of fluoroscopy equipment and the factors related to each procedure were investigated. This study was registered in the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN 000036525).

FINDINGS

Overall, 12959 fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures were included from 23 hospitals in Japan. For 11162 ERCPs, the median/third quartile values of Ka,r (mGy), PKA (Gycm2), and FT (min) were 69/145 mGy, 16/32 Gycm2, and 11/20 min, respectively. Similarly, these values were 106/219 mGy, 23/41 Gycm2 and 17/27 min for 374 interventional EUSs; 53/104 mGy, 16/32 Gycm2 and 10/15 min for 523 metallic stents; 56/104 mGy, 28/47 Gycm2, and 12/18 min for 599 tube placements; and 35/81 mGy, 16/43 Gycm2 and 7/15 min for 301 BAEs, respectively. For the overall radiation dose rate, the median/third quartile values of RDR were 5.9/9.4 (mGy/min). The RDR values at each institution varied widely.

INTERPRETATION

This study reports the current radiation doses of fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures expressed as DRL quantities. This will serve as a valuable reference for national DRL values.

FUNDING

This work was supported by a clinical research grant from the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.