Ruff Christer, Partovi Sasan, Strobel Isabella, Kaleth Stella, Herz Klaus, Nikolaou Konstantin, Levitin Abraham, Kirksey Levester, Syha Roland, Artzner Christoph, Grözinger Gerd
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse 3, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse 3, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2024 May 7;13(10):2732. doi: 10.3390/jcm13102732.
To evaluate radiation exposure in standard interventional radiology procedures using a twin robotic X-ray system compared to a state-of-the-art conventional angiography system. Standard interventional radiology procedures (port implantation, SIRT, and pelvic angiography) were simulated using an anthropomorphic Alderson RANDO phantom (Alderson Research Laboratories Inc. Stamford, CT, USA) on an above-the-table twin robotic X-ray scanner (Multitom Rax, Siemens Healthineers, Forchheim, Germany) and a conventional below-the-table angiography system (Artis Zeego, Siemens Healthineers, Forchheim, Germany). The phantom's radiation exposure (representing the potential patient on the procedure table) was measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters. Height-dependent dose curves were generated for examiners and radiation technologists in representative positions using a RaySafe X2 system (RaySafe, Billdal, Sweden). For all scenarios, the device-specific dose distribution differs depending on the imaging chain, with specific advantages and disadvantages. Radiation exposure for the patient is significantly increased when using the Multitom Rax for pelvic angiography compared to the Artis Zeego, which is evident in the dose progression through the phantom's body as well as in the organ-related radiation exposure. In line with these findings, there is an increased radiation exposure for the performing proceduralist, especially at eye level, which can be significantly minimized by using protective equipment ( < 0.001). In this study, the state-of-the-art conventional below-the-table angiography system is associated with lower radiation dose exposures for both the patient and the interventional radiology physician compared to an above-the-table twin robotic X-ray system for pelvic angiographies. However, in other clinical scenarios (port implantation or SIRT), both devices are suitable options with acceptable radiation exposure.
为评估与最先进的传统血管造影系统相比，使用双机器人X射线系统进行标准介入放射学程序时的辐射暴露情况。使用拟人化的Alderson RANDO体模（美国康涅狄格州斯坦福德市的Alderson Research Laboratories Inc.），在桌上型双机器人X射线扫描仪（德国福希海姆市西门子医疗的Multitom Rax）和传统的桌下血管造影系统（德国福希海姆市西门子医疗的Artis Zeego）上模拟标准介入放射学程序（端口植入、选择性内放射治疗和盆腔血管造影）。使用热释光剂量计测量体模的辐射暴露（代表手术台上的潜在患者）。使用RaySafe X2系统（瑞典比尔达尔市的RaySafe）为处于代表性位置的检查人员和放射技术人员生成高度相关的剂量曲线。对于所有情况，特定设备的剂量分布因成像链而异，各有优缺点。与Artis Zeego相比，使用Multitom Rax进行盆腔血管造影时患者的辐射暴露显著增加，这在剂量通过体模身体的进展以及与器官相关的辐射暴露中都很明显。与这些发现一致，执行手术的操作人员的辐射暴露也有所增加，尤其是在眼睛水平，使用防护设备可显著降低辐射暴露（<0.001）。在本研究中，与用于盆腔血管造影的桌上型双机器人X射线系统相比，最先进的传统桌下血管造影系统对患者和介入放射科医生的辐射剂量暴露更低。然而，在其他临床场景（端口植入或选择性内放射治疗）中，两种设备都是辐射暴露可接受的合适选择。
