New detectors and shielding improve radiologists' safety

Article

Two trends could potentially put interventional radiologists at greater risk of radiation exposure: the overall increase in image-guided procedures and a rise in the number of obese patients being treated.

Two trends could potentially put interventional radiologists at greater risk of radiation exposure: the overall increase in image-guided procedures and a rise in the number of obese patients being treated.

In normal-sized patients, the benefits of interventional radiology procedures generally outweigh the radiation risks. Obese patients, however, require a longer time in the fluoroscopy suite, subjecting interventionalists to longer exposure.

"It's more difficult to see the anatomy, and the procedure generally takes longer," said Carol McGee, a radiologist technologist at St. Luke's Hospital in Bethlehem, PA.

Research is ongoing to reduce radiation exposure in the interventional suite. Two studies presented at the 2005 Society of Interventional Radiology meeting found that flat-panel x-ray detectors and new radiation shields made of composite materials significantly reduced IRs' exposure to radiation.

McGee and colleagues at St. Luke's compared a conventional image-intensifier fluoroscopy system with a digital flat-panel angiography system on 44 random patients undergoing abdominal aortograms and inferior vena cava filter placements. The digital system reduced operator radiation exposure by as much as 54%.

The flat-panel system delivered 0.49 mrem of radiation dose, compared with 1.07 mrem for the conventional image intensifier. The flat-panel system also delivered better quality images (6 versus 5 on a 7-point Leikert scale), while using less contrast agent (213 mgI/mL versus 240 mgI/mL). The differences were statistically significant, McGee said.

The next step is to analyze the amount of radiation absorbed by the patient. Researchers have installed Diamentors in each fluoro room. Unlike dosimeters, these dose-measuring devices are hardwired into the machinery. McGee expects the flat-panel system to deliver less dose.

"The trend will be to gradually replace the conventional technology with flat-panel systems," she said.

In another study, Gary D. Hartwell, D.Sc., an assistant professor of radiology, and colleagues at the University of Virginia Health System evaluated the ability of lead-equivalent shielding material to reduce scatter radiation during interventional procedures. The investigators used an anthropomorphic phantom and a fluoro C-arm configured with its x-ray tube under the angiography table. They gauged exposure with a dosimeter at different body levels and C-arm positions. The exposure levels were measured in mrem/second at 30 degrees with and without shields, respectively:

- 2.1 versus 15.6 to the eye;

- 2.9 versus 20 to the chest;

- 3.1 versus 26.4 to the waist; and

- 2.9 versus 30.2 to the knee.

Composite shields used appropriately could reduce radiation exposure by more than 80%, he said.

Recent Videos
Study: MRI-Based AI Enhances Detection of Seminal Vesicle Invasion in Prostate Cancer
What New Research Reveals About the Impact of AI and DBT Screening: An Interview with Manisha Bahl, MD
Can AI Assessment of Longitudinal MRI Scans Improve Prediction for Pediatric Glioma Recurrence?
A Closer Look at MRI-Guided Adaptive Radiotherapy for Monitoring and Treating Glioblastomas
Incorporating CT Colonography into Radiology Practice
What New Research Reveals About Computed Tomography and Radiation-Induced Cancer Risk
What New Interventional Radiology Research Reveals About Treatment for Breast Cancer Liver Metastases
New Mammography Studies Assess Image-Based AI Risk Models and Breast Arterial Calcification Detection
Can Deep Learning Provide a CT-Less Alternative for Attenuation Compensation with SPECT MPI?
Employing AI in Detecting Subdural Hematomas on Head CTs: An Interview with Jeremy Heit, MD, PhD
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.