Radiation Dose Reduction during Radial Cardiac Catheterization: Evaluation of a Dedicated Radial Angiography Absorption Shielding Drape

Assessing the Efficacy of RADPAD Protection Drape in Reducing Radiation Exposure to Operators in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

One of the leading environmental hazards, ionizing radiation, is linked to several detrimental health consequences in the body. RADPAD (Worldwide Innovations & Technologies, Inc., Kansas City, Kansas) is a sterile, lead-free, lightweight, disposable radiation protection shield. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of RADPAD protection drapes in the cardiac catheterization lab and how they can aid interventional cardiologists in becoming subjected to less scatter radiation. PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for studies discussing the efficacy of RADPAD protection drapes in reducing radiation exposure to operators in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. A random-effects model was used to pool odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for endpoints: primary operator exposure dose, dose area product (DAP), relative exposure, and screening time. Our analysis included 892 patients from six studies. Compared to the No-RADPAD group, primary operator exposure dose (E) was significantly lower in the RADPAD group (OR: -0.9, 95% CI: -1.36 to -0.43, I2 = 80.5%, p = 0.0001). DAP was comparable between both groups (OR: 0.008, 95% CI: -0.12 to -0.14, I2 = 0%, p = 0.9066). There was no difference in the relative exposure (E/DAP) (OR: -0.47, 95% CI: -0.96 to 0.02, I2 = 0%, p = 0.90) and screening time (OR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.35, I2 = 0%, p = 0.22) between the two groups. The interventional cardiology laboratory is exposed to significantly less scatter radiation during procedures owing to the RADPAD protective drape. Consequently, all catheterization laboratories could be advised to employ RADPAD protective drapes.

Reduction in Primary Operator Radiation Dose Exposure During Coronary Angioplasty Using Radiation Absorbing Drape

Background Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) involves the use of ionizing radiation and is a common procedure in a cardiac catheterization suite. The RADPAD® surgical drape (Worldwide Innovations & Technologies, Inc., Lenexa, KS) has been developed to reduce scatter radiation exposure to primary operators during routine PCI procedures. This study aims to assess the efficacy of RADPAD drapes in reducing radiation dose in the catheterization laboratory. Methods This was a single-center, prospective, observational study that aimed to compare the primary operator dose received with and without the use of a commercially available shield (RADPAD) during PCI. A total of 53 consecutive patients undergoing PCI were randomized in a 1:1 pattern to receive either the RADPAD (study group) or no RADPAD (control group). Standard shielding and personal protective equipment were used. Radiation exposure to the primary operator, total fluoroscopy time, number of cine acquisitions, and air kerma were recorded for each procedure. A one-way ANOVA calculator, including the Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) test, was used to compare the mean values of radiation exposure. Scatterplot analysis and linear regression slopes of dose relative to air kerma were performed. All shields were reused once only. Results The study compared radiation exposure during PCI procedures between patients who received radiation attenuation devices (RADPAD) and those who did not. The RADPAD group had 30 patients, while the NO RADPAD group had 23 patients. There was a significant difference in the number of coronary angiography and single/multi-vessel PCI procedures between the two groups. There was no significant difference in procedural time or air kerma dose between the groups, but the RADPAD group had a significantly lower radiation dose (mean dose of 3.679 mrem) compared to the NO RADPAD group (mean dose of 8.12 mrem) (p < 0.00001). The primary operator dose per unit of air kerma was also significantly lower in the RADPAD group. Overall, the use of RADPAD resulted in a significant reduction in radiation exposure during PCI procedures. Conclusion The present study provides further evidence for the efficacy of using radiation-absorbing drapes (RADPAD) in reducing primary operator radiation dose exposure during coronary angioplasty. The equipment for radiation dose reduction of patients also reduces the radiation dose of medical staff. Therefore, the use of RADPAD is recommended as a safe and effective measure for reducing operator radiation dose exposure during coronary angioplasty.

Assessing lead curtains' impact on radiation protection in coronary interventions

The objective of this investigation is to assess the impact of supplementary lead curtains on the reduction of radiation dose exposure to operators during coronary interventional procedures. Seven standard positions during coronary angiography (foot, right foot, head, left foot, left lateral, left head, and right lateral) were simulated on a standard anthropomorphic phantom with radial artery access. Measurements were taken at two different heights, 125 cm and 155 cm, and dosimeters were used to measured surface incident dose rates for the first and second operators, both with and without additional lead curtains at various positions. Each position was measured 20 times, and arithmetic means were computed. At-test was utilised to compare dose rates with and without supplementary lead curtains, as well as dose rates with additional lead curtains at varying heights. The finding indicate that the dose rates of the first operator with supplementary lead curtains were not significantly lower compared to those without, except for the 125 cm head and left foot positions and the 155 cm head position with the additional lead curtain edge 10 cm below the umbilical level (tumbilical= 0.9, 0.4, 0.5,P> 0.05). The dose rates of the second operator with additional lead curtains were significantly lower than those without, with statistically significant differences (P< 0.05). The arithmetic mean dose rates for the first and second operators at each position were lowest when the upper edge of the additional lead curtain was situated 10 cm above the umbilical level. Employing supplementary lead curtains during coronary interventions effectively reduces radiation doses received by operators. The protective effect is enhanced when the additional lead curtain is closer to the irradiation field. Hence, it is recommended that additional curtains be employed judiciously, while ensuring that clinical procedures are not impeded, in order to effectively mitigate the radiation exposure of operators.

New Radioprotective Device that can be Used for Fluoroscopic Exam: Possibility to Contribute to Staff Exposure Protection During VFSS

The videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) is a recognized standard diagnostic imaging technique that is used to investigate swallowing disorders and dysphagia. Patients were assessed in a seated posture on a chair or wheelchair. Using X-ray fluoroscopy, the state of patients' swallowing was checked by eating and drinking according to the physician's instructions. VFSS procedures are prolonged, and VFSS staff members are exposed to radiation. Therefore, we evaluated original lead shielding device (OLSD) that can be attached to the handrail of a table and placed vertically. The OLSD has a lead-equivalent thickness of 0.3 mmPb, weighs about 6 kg, and has the dimensions 50 cm × 50 cm × 8.0 mm. We used a human phantom and a radiation survey meter with and without protection from scattered radiation at the positions of the physician and medical staff at the height of 150 cm above the floor (i.e., the height of the eye's crystalline lens). After measuring the scattered radiation, we created radiation maps with and without the OLSD. The dose rate at the physician's position without and with the OLSD was 190 µSv/h and 92 µSv/h, respectively, and a dose reduction of 51.6% with the plate. Moreover, the radiation maps added clarity to the distribution of the scattered radiation. Such information should lead to greater awareness about exposures to physicians and other medical staff. Thus, the OLSD effectively provided protection from scattered radiation at the physician's position during fluoroscopy. It may contribute to the reduction of staff exposure for VFSS.

Radiation protection for the interventional cardiologist: Practical approach and innovations

Use of ionizing radiation during cardiac catheterization interventions adversely impacts both the patients and medical staff. In recent years, radiation dose in cardiac catheterization interventions has become a topic of increasing interest in interventional cardiology and there is a strong interest in reducing radiation exposure during the procedures. This review presents the current status of radiation protection in the cardiac catheterization laboratory and summarizes a practical approach for radiation dose management for minimizing radiation exposure. This review also presents recent innovations that have clinical potential for reducing radiation during cardiac interventions.

Cardiac catheterization real-time dynamic radiation dose measurement to estimate lifetime attributable risk of cancer

Cardiac catheterization procedure is the gold standard to diagnose and treat cardiovascular disease. However, radiation safety and cancer risk remain major concerns. This study aimed to real-time dynamic radiation dose measurement to estimate lifetime attributable risk (LAR) of cancer incidence and mortality in operators. Coronary angiography (CA) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), CA, and others (radiofrequency ablation, pacemaker and defibrillator implantation) procedures with different beam directions, were undertaken on x-ray angiography system. A real-time electronic personal dosimeter (EPD) system was used to measure the radiation dose of staff during all procedures. We followed the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII report to estimate the LAR of all cancer incidence and mortality. Primary operators received radiation dose in CA with PCI, CA, and others procedures were 59.33 ± 95.03 μSv, 39.81 ± 103.85 μSv, and 21.92 ± 37.04 μSv, respectively. As to the assistant operators were 30.03 ± 55.67 μSv, 14.67 ± 14.88 μSv, and 4 μSv, respectively. LAR of all cancer incidences for staffs aged from 18 to 65 are varied from 0.40% for males to 1.50% for females. LAR of all cancer mortality for staffs aged from 18 to 65 are varied from 0.22% for males to 0.83% for females. Our study provided an easy, real-time and dynamic radiation dose measurement to estimate LAR of cancer for staff during the cardiac catheterization procedures. The LAR for all cancer incidence is about twice that for cancer mortality. Although the radiation doses of staff are lower during each procedure, the increased years of service leads to greater radiation risk to the staff.

Radiation protection in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

The trend towards more minimally invasive procedures in the past few decades has resulted in an exponential growth in fluoroscopy-guided catheter-based cardiology procedures. As these techniques are becoming more commonly used and developed, the adverse effects of radiation exposure to the patient, operator, and ancillary staff have been a subject of concern. Although occupational radiation dose limits are being monitored and seldom reached, exposure to chronic, low dose radiation has been shown to have harmful biological effects that are not readily apparent until years after. Given this, it is imperative that reducing radiation dose exposure in the cardiac catheterization laboratory remains a priority. Staff education and training, radiation dose monitoring, ensuring use of proper personal protective equipment, employment of shields, and various procedural techniques in minimizing radiation must always be diligently employed. Special care and consideration should be extended to pregnant women working in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. This review article presents a practical approach to radiation dose management and discusses best practice recommendations in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Operators' radiation exposure reduction during cardiac catheterization using a removable shield

Cardiac catheterization through radial access is associated with significant ionizing radiation exposure for the operator. We aimed at evaluating whether a removable shield placed upon the patient could impact favorably on annual radiation exposure for the operator. We designed a pre-post study comparing radiation exposure in a total of five operators under standard protection procedures (first period) and after applying a removable shield (second period). Each period included all the procedures performed in 1 year. Radiation exposure was measured through three dosimeters on each operator. A total of 1610 procedures were performed during the first period, and 1670 during the second period. For each operator, Fluoroscopy Time (FT) per exam did not differ between the two periods (13.1 ± 1 vs 12.9 ± 2 min/exam, p = 0.73), whereas Dose-Area Product (DAP) per procedure was slightly higher in the second period (5.247 ± 651 vs 6.374 ± 967 mGy/cm², p < 0.01). The use of a removable shield significantly reduced operators' radiation dose at the left bracelet (64.3 ± 13.3 μSv/exam vs 23.8 ± 6.0 μSv/exam, p = 0.003). This remained significant even after adjustment for DAP per procedure (p = 0.015) and number of operators participating to each procedure (p = 0.013), whereas no significant difference was observed for card (5.6 ± 10.5 μSv/exam vs 0.9 ± 0.3 μSv/exam, p = 0.36) and neck bands (3.3 ± 4.5 μSv/exam vs 2.0 ± 2.0 μSv/exam, p = 0.36) dosimeters. The use of a removable shield during cardiac catheterization reduces radiation exposure at the level of the operator's upper limb, whereas no difference was found for other body parts. This may help in reducing radiation exposure of operator's hand. DAP increase merits further investigation.

IMPACT OF PELVIC AND RAD-BOARD LEAD SHIELDS ON OPERATOR AND PATIENT RADIATION DOSE IN TRANS-RADIAL CORONARY PROCEDURES

BACKGROUND

Trans-radial approach for cardiac catheterisation procedures has long been associated with high operator and patient radiation dose. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of pelvic and radial shields on decreasing coronary procedure radiation doses.

METHODS

A total of 418 patients randomly underwent diagnostic and therapeutic cardiac procedures with and without the pelvic and rad-board lead shields during the procedures. The operator and patient doses were then determined by means of a personal dosimeter and dose area product (DAP), respectively.

RESULTS

The shields decreased the operator radiation dose by 40% in coronary angiography (CA) and by 45% during angioplasty (PCI). These results were achieved at the cost of increased patient radiation dose.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic lead shields combined with rad-board shields are highly effective in reducing operator radiation dose in trans-radial approach, but it is only achieved at the cost of increased patient DAP.

Efficacy of RADPAD protection drape in reducing radiation exposure in the catheterization laboratory-First Indian study

BACKGROUND

Occupational radiation exposureis a growing problem due to increasing number and complexity of interventional procedures.The RADPAD is a lead-free sterile drape containing bismuth and barium that reduces scatter radiation during fluoroscopic procedures. We aimed to study the radiation exposure reduction to operators with the use of RADPAD and also measureradiation doses in different angiographic projections.

METHODS

65 randomly selected patients undergoing elective complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures from January 2017 to 2017 were randomized in a 1:1 pattern with or without the RADPAD. Primary endpoint was the ratio of operator received dose in mrem to total radiation in Gyat the end of the procedure which was designated ''Relative operator exposure'', with or without RADPAD.

RESULTS

Despite similar fluoroscopy times (20.4 ± 9.4 min with RADPAD vs. 19.4 ± 9.2 min without RADPAD, P = 0.871) and total radiation dose (3.4 ± 4.3 Gy with RADPAD vs. 2.3 ± 1.4 Gy, P = 0.198), the relative operator exposure was significantly less with RADPAD (1.39 ± 0.95) as compared to no RADPAD group (2.27 ± 1.4) (p = 0.004) amounting to a 39% reduction. Additionally mean radiation dose per shoot of recorded Left anterior oblique (LAO) oriented projections was 34.4 ± 15.7mGyvs 24.9 ± 12.9 mGy for a non LAO oriented projection. (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RADPAD significantly reduces radiation exposure to the primary operator during prolonged complex PCI procedures. Further, amongst all views, LAO views have significantly higher emitted radiation as compared to Non LAO views and need more radiation protection.

The effectiveness of additional lead-shielding drape and low pulse rate fluoroscopy in protecting staff from scatter radiation during cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT)

PURPOSE

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) often requires a long fluoroscopic time and protection from scatter radiation. This study reports on scatter radiation levels during CRT, with and without additional shielding, and using standard or low pulse rate fluoroscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Additional lead-shielding drape (0.35-mm lead equivalent) was used on the left side of the table and pulsed fluoroscopy was performed at rates of 10 pulses/s (usual rate) and 7.5 pulses/s (low pulse rate). Fluoroscopy scatter radiation was measured for both pulse rates using an acrylic phantom with a radiation survey meter, both with and without the additional lead-shielding drape.

RESULTS

With the additional lead-shielding drape, the fluoroscopy scatter radiation was reduced by 74.3% at 10 pulses/s and 78.6% at 7.5 pulses/s. If the fluoroscopy was changed from 10 pulses/s to 7.5 pulses/s, the scattered radiation at the primary physician's position was reduced by 24.0%. The combined use of additional shielding drape and low pulse rate fluoroscopy reduced scatter radiation by over 80%.

CONCLUSION

Additional lead-shielding drape and low pulse rate fluoroscopy are effective in reducing the scattered radiation dose to physicians and nurses during CRT.

Impact of the Ceiling-Mounted Radiation Shielding Position on the Physician's Dose from Scatter Radiation during Interventional Procedures

The effect of the ceiling-mounted radiation shielding on the amount of the scatter radiation was assessed under conditions simulating obese patients for clinically relevant exposure parameters. Measurements were performed in different projections and with different positions of the ceiling-mounted shielding: without shielding; shielding closest to the patient; and shielding closest to the physician performing the procedure. The protection provided by the shielding was assessed for cardiology when the femoral access is used and for radiology when the physician performs the procedure in the abdominal area. The results show that the use of the ceiling-mounted shielding can decrease the dose from the scatter radiation by 95% at the position of the performing physician. In cardiology, the impact is more pronounced when the left oblique projection is used. In radiology, a large decrease was observed for right oblique projections, compared to cardiology. The ceiling-mounted shielding should be placed as close to the physician as possible. The idea of creating the largest radiation shadow by placing the radiation shielding as close to the patient as possible does not provide as effective radiation protection of the operator as it might be thought.

Effectiveness of a New Lead-Shielding Device and Additional Filter for Reducing Staff and Patient Radiation Exposure During Videofluoroscopic Swallowing Study Using a Human Phantom

Interventional radiology procedures often involve lengthy exposure to fluoroscopy-derived radiation. We therefore devised a videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) procedure using a human phantom that proved to protect the patient and physician by reducing the radiation dose. We evaluated a new lead-shielding device and separately attached additional filters (1.0-, 2.0-, and 3.0-mm Al filters and a 0.5-mm Cu filter) during VFSS to reduce the patient's entrance skin dose (ESD). A monitor attached to the human phantom's neck measured the ESD. We also developed another lead shield (VFSS Shielding Box, 1.0-mm Pb equivalent) and tested its efficacy using the human phantom and an ionization chamber radiation survey meter with and without protection from scattered radiation at the physician's position on the phantom. We then measured the scattered radiation (at 90 and 150 cm above the floor) after combining the filters with the VFSS Shielding Box. With the additional filters, the ESD was reduced by 15.4-55.1%. With the VFSS Shielding Box alone, the scattered radiation was reduced by about 10% compared with the dose without additional shielding. With the VFSS Shielding Box and filters combined, the scattered radiation dose was reduced by a maximum of about 44% at the physician's position. Thus, the additional lead-shielding device effectively provided protection from scattered radiation during fluoroscopy. These results indicate that the combined VFSS Shielding Box and filters can effectively reduce the physician's and patient's radiation doses.

Right lateral versus left lateral view for forearm coronary angiography. An operator radiation exposure and image quality study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyze the operator radiation exposure (ORE) and the image quality in a coronary angiography (CA) of the standard left lateral view (LLV) and compare it with an alternative right lateral view (RLV).

BACKGROUND

Interventional cardiologists are exposed to high doses of scatter radiation, especially in angulated projections.

METHODS

We prospectively included consecutive patients who underwent diagnostic CA. A standard +90° LLV and an alternative RLV (-90°) were done in each patient with the same protocol. The operator effective dose rate (mSv/h) was determined for each projection with digital dosimeters located in the collar, waist and knee. The image quality of both the LLV and RLV was analyzed and compared to a standard projection.

RESULTS

116 patients were enrolled; left coronary artery (LCA) was assessed in 52 patients and right coronary artery (RCA) in 64 patients. The ORE was significantly lower with the RLV compared to the conventional LLV with a maximum ORE reduction of 91.5% in the operator waist (LLV: 6.84 mSv h^-1 versus RLV: 0.58 mSv h^-1, p < 0.001). No significant differences in image quality were observed for the RCA in both projections. For the LCA, a slight loss of quality was observed with the RLV.

CONCLUSIONS

-90° RLV is associated with a significant decrease in ORE compared to the conventional +90° LLV without losing image resolution for the RCA and resulting in a slight quality loss for the LCA evaluation. The RLV should be the first choice for RCA evaluation. For the LCA, the RLV loss of resolution should be balanced with the benefit of minimizing ORE, mainly in cases with long fluoroscopy times, such as complex percutaneous coronary interventional procedures.

A novel radiation protection device based on tungsten functional paper for application in interventional radiology

Tungsten functional paper (TFP), which contains 80% tungsten by weight, has radiation‐shielding properties. We investigated the use of TFP for the protection of operators during interventional or therapeutic angiography. The air kerma rate of scattered radiation from a simulated patient was measured, with and without TFP, using a water‐equivalent phantom and fixed C‐arm fluoroscopy. Measurements were taken at the level of the operator's eye, chest, waist, and knee, with a variable number of TFP sheets used for shielding. A Monte Carlo simulation was also utilized to analyze the dose rate delivered with and without the TFP shielding. In cine mode, when the number of TFP sheets was varied through 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10, the respective reduction in the air kerma rate relative to no TFP shielding was as follows: at eye level, 24.9%, 29.9%, 41.6%, 50.4%, and 56.2%; at chest level, 25.3%, 33.1%, 34.9%, 46.1%, and 44.3%; at waist level, 45.1%, 57.0%, 64.4%, 70.7%, and 75.2%; and at knee level, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.1%, and 2.1%. In fluoroscopy mode, the respective reduction in the air kerma rate relative to no TFP shielding was as follows: at eye level, 24.8%, 30.3%, 34.8%, 51.1%, and 58.5%; at chest level, 25.8%, 33.4%, 35.5%, 45.2%, and 44.4%; at waist level, 44.6%, 56.8%, 64.7%, 71.7%, and 77.2%; and at knee level, 2.2%, 0.0%, 2.2%, 2.8%, and 2.5%. The TFP paper exhibited good radiation‐shielding properties against the scattered radiation encountered in clinical settings, and was shown to have potential application in decreasing the radiation exposure to the operator during interventional radiology.

Image noise reduction technology reduces radiation in a radial-first cardiac catheterization laboratory

BACKGROUND

Transradial coronary angiography (TRA) has been associated with increased radiation doses. We hypothesized that contemporary image noise reduction technology would reduce radiation doses in the cardiac catheterization laboratory in a typical clinical setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis of 400 consecutive patients who underwent diagnostic and interventional cardiac catheterizations in a predominantly TRA laboratory with traditional fluoroscopy (N=200) and a new image noise reduction fluoroscopy system (N=200). The primary endpoint was radiation dose (mGy cm²). Secondary endpoints were contrast dose, fluoroscopy times, number of cineangiograms, and radiation dose by operator between the two study periods. Radiation was reduced by 44.7% between the old and new cardiac catheterization laboratory (75.8mGycm²±74.0 vs. 41.9mGycm²±40.7, p<0.0001). Radiation was reduced for both diagnostic procedures (45.9%, p<0.0001) and interventional procedures (37.7%, p<0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in radiation dose between individual operators (p=0.84). In multivariate analysis, radiation dose remained significantly decreased with the use of the new system (p<0.0001) and was associated with weight (p<0.0001), previous coronary artery bypass grafting (p<0.0007) and greater than 3 stents used (p<0.0004). TRA was used in 90% of all cases in both periods. Compared with a transfemoral approach (TFA), TRA was not associated with higher radiation doses (p=0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Image noise reduction technology significantly reduces radiation dose in a contemporary radial-first cardiac catheterization clinical practice.

Reduction of occupational radiation dose in staff at the cardiac catheterisation laboratory by protective material placed on the patient

Reducing occupational radiation dose in cardiac catheterisation laboratories is one of the objectives of the radiation protection system because the procedures performed involve high levels of radiation compared with others in health care. Recommendations on protection methods used are referred to different structural types and personal protection tools. In this work, the effectiveness of a shielding drape above the patient in different geometric shapes for a standard procedure in interventional cardiology was evaluated. Values of personal dose equivalent Hp(10) obtained simultaneously with three active electronic semiconductor dosemeters located at the usual position of staff and at the C-arm have been used to show the usefulness of the shielding drape.

Editor's choice--Use of disposable radiation-absorbing surgical drapes results in significant dose reduction during EVAR procedures

OBJECTIVES

Because of the increasing number of interventional endovascular procedures with fluoroscopy and the corresponding high annual dose for interventionalists, additional dose-protecting measures are desirable. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of disposable radiation-absorbing surgical drapes in reducing scatter radiation exposure for interventionalists and supporting staff during an endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedure.

MATERIALS

This was a randomized control trial in which 36 EVAR procedures were randomized between execution with and without disposable radiation-absorbing surgical drapes (Radpad: Worldwide Innovations & Technologies, Inc., Kansas City, US, type 5511A). Dosimetric measurements were performed on the interventionalist (hand and chest) and theatre nurse (chest) with and without the use of the drapes to obtain the dose reduction and effect on the annual dose caused by the drapes.

RESULTS

Use of disposable radiation-absorbing surgical drapes resulted in dose reductions of 49%, 55%, and 48%, respectively, measured on the hand and chest of the interventionalist and the chest of the theatre nurse.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of disposable radiation-absorbing surgical drapes significantly reduces scatter radiation exposure for both the interventionalist and the supporting staff during EVAR procedures.