Suppr超能文献

一项随机对照试验,旨在评估使用带有标准盆腔屏蔽的RAD BOARD®与仅使用标准盆腔屏蔽相比,心脏导管插入术操作人员的辐射暴露情况。

A randomized controlled trial to assess operator radiation exposure from cardiac catheterization procedures using RAD BOARD® with standard pelvic shielding versus standard pelvic shielding alone.

作者信息

Suryadevara Ramya, Brown Eddie D, Green Sandy M, Scott Thomas D, Nordberg Cara M, Blankenship James C

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Harton Regional Medical Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee.

Department of Cardiology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan;95(1):83-88. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28190. Epub 2019 Mar 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To study radiation exposure to the primary operator during diagnostic cardiac catheterizations using a radio-dense RAD BOARD® radial access arm board.

BACKGROUND

The use of radial access for catheterization in the United States has increased from 1% in 2007 to 41% in 2018. Compared to femoral access, operator radiation exposure from radial access is similar or higher. The RAD BOARD radio-dense radial access arm board has been marketed as reducing radiation to operators by 44%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We randomized 265 patients undergoing catheterization via right radial access to standard pelvic lead drape shielding (nonboard group) versus RAD BOARD in addition to pelvic drape (board group). Operator radiation exposure was measured using Landauer Microstar nanoDot™ badges worn by the operator.

RESULTS

Board and nonboard groups were similar with respect to demographic and procedural variables. Mean operator dose per case was higher in the board group (.65mSieverts) than in the nonboard group (.56mSieverts, P < 0.0001). In sub-group analyses, radiation doses were higher in the board group compared to the nonboard group in patients across all body mass index groups (P < 0.03). In multivariate analysis, operator dose correlated with use of the RAD BOARD more closely than any other variable (P < 0.001). Post hoc analysis of the table setup with RAD BOARD revealed that use of RAD BOARD prevented placement of a shield normally inserted into the top of the standard below-table shield.

CONCLUSION

RAD BOARD with the pelvic shield was associated with higher radiation exposure to the operator compared with pelvic shield alone, likely due to inability to use standard radiation shielding along with the RAD BOARD.

摘要

目的

使用放射性致密的RAD BOARD®桡动脉入路臂板,研究诊断性心导管插入术期间术者的辐射暴露情况。

背景

在美国,桡动脉入路用于导管插入术的比例已从2007年的1%增至2018年的41%。与股动脉入路相比,桡动脉入路导致术者的辐射暴露相似或更高。RAD BOARD放射性致密桡动脉入路臂板在市场上宣称可将术者的辐射减少44%。

材料与方法

我们将265例经右桡动脉入路行导管插入术的患者随机分为两组,一组采用标准盆腔铅帘屏蔽(非臂板组),另一组除盆腔铅帘外还使用RAD BOARD臂板(臂板组)。通过术者佩戴的Landauer Microstar nanoDot™徽章测量术者的辐射暴露。

结果

臂板组和非臂板组在人口统计学和操作变量方面相似。臂板组每例患者的术者平均剂量(0.65毫西弗)高于非臂板组(0.56毫西弗,P < 0.0001)。在亚组分析中,所有体重指数组的患者中,臂板组的辐射剂量均高于非臂板组(P < 0.03)。在多变量分析中,术者剂量与RAD BOARD臂板的使用相关性比其他任何变量都更密切(P < 0.001)。对使用RAD BOARD臂板的手术台设置进行事后分析发现,使用RAD BOARD臂板妨碍了通常插入标准台下屏蔽顶部的一个屏蔽的放置。

结论

与单独使用盆腔屏蔽相比,使用盆腔屏蔽的RAD BOARD臂板使术者受到的辐射暴露更高,这可能是由于无法将标准辐射屏蔽与RAD BOARD臂板一起使用所致。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验