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

Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology

Exposure to ionizing radiation is an inherent occupational health hazard in clinical cardiology. Health risks have been reported previously, including predilection to cancer. In addition, orthopedic injury due to prolonged wearing of heavy protective lead aprons, which are mandatory to reduce radiation risk, have been extensively documented. Cardiology as a specialty has grown with rising volumes of increasingly complex procedures. This includes electrophysiological, coronary, and structural intervention, advanced heart failure/transplant management, and diagnostic imaging. Both the operator as well imaging specialists are exposed to radiation, particularly in structural interventions where interventional cardiologists and structural imagers work closely. Increasingly, women interested in cardiology may deselect the field due to radiation concerns. This expert document highlights the risks of radiation exposure in cardiology, including practical tips within various subspecialty fields such as interventional/structural cardiology, electrophysiology, imaging, advanced heart failure, and pediatric cardiology.

Radiation reduction in a modern catheterization laboratory: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Measures were undertaken at the Cleveland Clinic to reduce radiation exposure to patients and personnel working in the catheterization laboratories. We report our experience with these improved systems over a 7-year period in patients undergoing diagnostic catheterization (DC) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs).

METHODS

Patients were categorized into preinitiative (2009-2012) and postinitiative (2013-2019) groups in the DC and PCI cohorts. Propensity score matching was done between the pre- and postinitiative groups for both cohorts based on age, sex, body surface area, total fluoroscopy time, and total acquisition time. The effectiveness of radiation reduction measures was assessed by comparing the total air kerma (K_a,r ), and fluoroscopy- and acquisition-mode air kerma in patients in the two groups.

RESULTS

In the DC cohort, there was a significant reduction in K_a,r in the postinitiative group in comparison to the preinitiative group (median, 396 vs. 857 mGy; p < 0.001). In the PCI cohort, K_a,r in the postinitiative group was 1265 mGy, which was significantly lower than the corresponding values in the preinitiative group (1994 mGy; p < 0.001). We also observed a significant reduction in fluoroscopy- and acquisition-based air kerma rates, and air kerma area product in the postinitiative group in comparison to the preinitiative group in both matched and unmatched DC and PCI cohorts after the institution of radiation reduction measures.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant and sustained reduction in radiation exposure to patients in the catheterization laboratory with the implementation of advanced protocols. Similar algorithms can be applied in other laboratories to achieve a similar reduction in radiation exposure.