Table of Contents
ISRN Cardiology
Volume 2012, Article ID 769167, 5 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/769167
Research Article

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

1Division of Cardiology, University of Illinois at Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA
2Department of Medicine, Roger Williams Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Providence, RI 02908, USA
3Department of Medicine and the Bluhm Cardiovascular Institute, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA

Received 29 May 2012; Accepted 29 July 2012

Academic Editors: O. F. Bertrand, S.-J. Park, and F. Quaini

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Ertel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. S. Jolly, S. Amlani, M. Hamon, S. Yusuf, and S. R. Mehta, “Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography or intervention and the impact on major bleeding and ischemic events: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials,” American Heart Journal, vol. 157, no. 1, pp. 132–140, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. A. G. Ziakas, K. C. Koskinas, S. Gavrilidis et al., “Radial versus femoral access for orally anticoagulated patients,” Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 493–499, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. Y. J. Yang, D. E. Kandzari, Z. Gao et al., “Transradial versus transfemoral method of percutaneous coronary revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: comparison of procedural and late-term outcomes,” JACC, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 1035–1042, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. K. Nadarasa, M. C. Robertson, C. K. Wong et al., “Rapid cycle change to predominantly radial access coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: effect on vascular access site complications,” Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 589–594, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. J. Neill, H. Douglas, G. Richardson et al., “Comparison of radiation dose and the effect of operator experience in femoral and radial arterial access for coronary procedures,” American Journal of Cardiology, vol. 106, no. 7, pp. 936–940, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. M. Mercuri, S. Mehta, C. Xie, N. Valettas, J. L. Velianou, and M. K. Natarajan, “Radial artery access as a predictor of increased radiation exposure during a diagnostic cardiac catheterization procedure,” JACC, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 347–352, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. Kassam, W. J. Cantor, D. Patel et al., “Radial versus femoral access for rescue percutaneous coronary intervention with adjuvant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use,” Canadian Journal of Cardiology, vol. 20, no. 14, pp. 1439–1442, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. M. Sandborg, S. G. Fransson, and H. Peterson, “Evaluation of patient-absorbed doses during coronary angiography and intervention by femoral and radial artery access,” European Radiology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 653–658, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. C. Brasselet, T. Blanpain, S. Tassan-Mangina et al., “Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions by radial and femoral routes,” European Heart Journal, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 63–70, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. L. Venneri, F. Rossi, N. Botto et al., “Cancer risk from professional exposure in staff working in cardiac catheterization laboratory: Insights from the National Research Council's biological effects of ionizing radiation VII report,” American Heart Journal, vol. 157, no. 1, pp. 118–124, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. Mercuri, G. R. Moran, L. Gauthier, T. Sheth, J. L. Velianou, and M. K. Natarajan, “Radiation dose in interventional cardiology procedures: urgent need for monitoring dose and establishing diagnostic reference levels,” Healthcare Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 76–83, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. Energy USDo. The Office of Health, Safety and Security Phantom Library. 2011, United States Department of Energy Phantom Library.
  13. E. L. Nickoloff, K. J. Strauss, B. T. Austin et al., “Cardiac catheterization equipment performance,” AAPM Report 70, Report of Task Group #17 Diagnostic X-ray Imaging Committee, Madison, Wis, USA, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  14. A. Sciahbasi, E. Romagnoli, C. Trani et al., “Operator radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary procedures through the left or right radial approach: the TALENT dosimetric substudy,” Circulation, vol. 4, pp. 226–231, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  15. K. P. Kim, D. L. Miller, S. Balter et al., “Occupational radiation doses to operators performing cardiac catheterization procedures,” Health Physics, vol. 94, no. 3, pp. 211–227, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. S. Dromi, B. J. Wood, J. Oberoi, and Z. Neeman, “Heavy metal pad shielding during fluoroscopic interventions,” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 1201–1206, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. K. A. Fetterly, D. J. Magnuson, G. M. Tannahill, M. D. Hindal, and V. Mathew, “Effective use of radiation shields to minimize operator dose during invasive cardiology procedures,” JACC, vol. 4, pp. 1133–1139, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  18. L. Politi, G. Biondi-Zoccai, L. Nocetti et al., “Reduction of scatter radiation during transradial percutaneous coronary angiography: a randomized trial using a lead-free radiation shield,” Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 97–102, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus