Does a flat panel detector reduce the patient radiaton dose in interventional cardiology?

Dragusin, Octavian; Breisch, R; Bokou, C.; Beissel, Jean

doi:10.1093/rpd/ncq008

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The patient dose and image quality in any newer modality needs to be permanently monitored and transition from II to FPD requires careful attention. [33]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition from image intensifier to flat panel detector in interventional cardiology: Impact of radiation dose

Livingstone¹,

Chase²,

Varghese³

et al. 2015

J Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flat panel detector (FPD) technology in interventional cardiology is on the increase due to its varied advantages compared to the conventional image intensifier (II) systems. It is not clear whether FPD imparts lower radiation doses compared to II systems though a few studies support this finding. This study intends to compare radiation doses from II and FPD systems for coronaryangiography (CAG) and Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty (PTCA) performed in a tertiary referral center. Radiation doses were measured using dose area product (DAP) meter from patients who underwent CAG (n = 222) and PTCA (n = 75) performed using FPD angiography system. The DAP values from FPD were compared with earlier reported data using II systems from the same referral center where the study was conducted. The mean DAP values from FPD system for CAG and PTCA were 24.35 and 63.64 Gycm2 and those from II system were 27.71 and 65.44 Gycm2. Transition from II to FPD system requires stringent dose optimization strategies right from the initial period of installation.

show abstract

“…The patient dose and image quality in any newer modality needs to be permanently monitored and transition from II to FPD requires careful attention. [33]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition from image intensifier to flat panel detector in interventional cardiology: Impact of radiation dose

Livingstone¹,

Chase²,

Varghese³

et al. 2015

J Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Owing to concerns on radiation doses from interventional procedures, diagnostic reference levels (DRL) are suggested. In their study, Dragusin et al (30) report a reference level for FT, KAP, and Ka,r of 5 min, 23 Gycm 2 , and 376 mGy, respectively, from FD system. From our study, the third quartile KAP values and Ka,r was 16.76 Gycm 2 and 285.91 mGy, respectively, for FT of 4.02 min for nine commonly used angiographic projections with a maximum of 12 cine acquisitions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation doses and estimated risk from angiographic projections during coronary angiography performed using novel flat detector

Varghese

Livingstone

Varghese

et al. 2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronary angiography (CA) procedure uses various angiographic projections to elicit detailed information of the coronary arteries with some steep projections involving high radiation dose to patients. This study intends to evaluate radiation doses and estimated risk from angiographic projections during CA procedure performed using novel flat detector (FD) system with improved image processing and noise reduction techniques. Real‐time monitoring of radiation doses using kerma‐area product (KAP) meter was performed for 140 patients using Philips Clarity FD system. The CA procedure involved seven standard projections, of which five were extensively selected by interventionalists. Mean fluoroscopic time (FT), KAP, and reference air kerma (Ka,r) for CA procedure were 3.24 min (0.5–10.51), 13.99 Gycm2 (4.02–37.6), and 231.43 mGy (73.8–622.15), respectively. Effective dose calculated using Monte Carlo‐based PCXMC software was found to be 4.9 mSv. Left anterior oblique (LAO) 45° projection contributed the highest radiation dose (28%) of the overall KAP. Radiation‐induced risk was found to be higher in females compared to males with increased risk of lung cancer. An increase of 10%–15% in radiation dose was observed when one or more additional projections were adopted along with the seven standard projections. A 14% reduction of radiation dose was achieved from novel FD system when low‐dose protocol during fluoroscopy and medium‐dose protocol during cine acquisitions were adopted, compared to medium‐dose protocol.PACS number(s): 87.50.cm, 87.55.de, 87.55.N, 87.59.cf, 87.59.Dj

show abstract

“…In our center in Luxembourg (Institut National de Chirurgie Cardiaque et de Cardiologie Interventionnelle), we perform continuously an internal audit related to radiation protection in clinical practice. Some results of our experience were already published (Bokou et al, 2008;Dragusin et al, 2010). All interventional cardiologists have taken part of two days continuous education course in radiation protection.…”

Section: Optimization Strategies Of Image Quality and Radiation Dosementioning

confidence: 94%

Optimization of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories

Dragusin¹,

Bokou²,

Wagner³

et al. 2011

Advances in the Diagnosis of Coronary Atherosclerosis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does a flat panel detector reduce the patient radiaton dose in interventional cardiology?

Cited by 16 publications

References 7 publications

Transition from image intensifier to flat panel detector in interventional cardiology: Impact of radiation dose

Transition from image intensifier to flat panel detector in interventional cardiology: Impact of radiation dose

Radiation doses and estimated risk from angiographic projections during coronary angiography performed using novel flat detector

Optimization of Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About