Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Veterans Crisis Line Badge
Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Panetta CJ, Galbraith EM, Yanavitski M, Koller PK, Shah B, Iqbal S, Cigarroa JE, Gordon G, Rao SV. Reduced radiation exposure in the cardiac catheterization laboratory with a novel vertical radiation shield. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions : Official Journal of The Society For Cardiac Angiography & Interventions. 2020 Jan 1; 95(1):7-12.
PubMed logo Search for Abstract from PubMed
(This link leaves the website of VA HSR&D.)


Abstract: OBJECTIVES: Investigation of novel vertical radiation shield (VRS) in reducing operator radiation exposure. BACKGROUND: Radiation exposure to the operator remains an occupational health hazard in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL). METHODS: A mannequin simulating an operator was placed near a computational phantom, simulating a patient. Measurement of dose equivalent and Air Kerma located the angle with the highest radiation, followed by a common magnification (8 in.) and comparison of horizontal radiation absorbing pads (HRAP) with or without VRS with two different: CCL, phantoms, and dosimeters. Physician exposure was subsequently measured prospectively with or without VRS during clinical procedures. RESULTS: Dose equivalent and Air Kerma to the mannequin was highest at left anterior oblique (LAO)-caudal angle (p? < .005). Eight-inch magnification increased mGray by 86.5% and µSv/min by 12.2% compared to 10-in. (p? < .005). Moving 40?cm from the access site lowered µSv/min by 30% (p? < .005). With LAO-caudal angle and 8-in. magnification, VRS reduced µSv/min by 59%, (p? < .005) in one CCL and µSv by 100% (p = .016) in second CCL in addition to HRAP. Prospective study of 177 procedures with HRAP, found VRS lowered µSv by 41.9% (µSv: 15.2?±?13.4 vs. 26.2?±?31.4, p = .001) with no difference in mGray. The difference was significant after multivariate adjustment for specified variables (p? < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Operator radiation exposure is significantly reduced utilizing a novel VRS, HRAP, and distance from the X-ray tube, and consideration of lower magnification and avoiding LAO-caudal angles to lower radiation for both operator and patient.

Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.