Practical ways to reduce radiation dose for patients and staff during device implantations and electrophysiological procedures

• Published in: Europace (London, England) Vol. 16; no. 7; pp. 946 - 964
• Main Authors: Heidbuchel, Hein, Wittkampf, Fred H M, Vano, Eliseo, Ernst, Sabine, Schilling, Richard, Picano, Eugenio, Mont, Lluis, Jais, Pierre, de Bono, Joseph, Piorkowski, Christopher, Saad, Eduardo, Femenia, Francisco
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England 01.07.2014
• Subjects: Cardiac Catheterization - adverse effects; Cardiac Catheterization - instrumentation; Cardiac Catheterization - standards; Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac - adverse effects; Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac - instrumentation; Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac - standards; Equipment Design; Fluoroscopy - standards; Humans; Occupational Exposure - adverse effects; Occupational Exposure - prevention & control; Occupational Exposure - standards; Occupational Health - standards; Patient Safety - standards; Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects; Prosthesis Implantation - instrumentation; Prosthesis Implantation - standards; Radiation Dosage; Radiation Injuries - etiology; Radiation Injuries - prevention & control; Radiation Monitoring - standards; Radiation Protection - standards; Radiography, Interventional - adverse effects; Radiography, Interventional - instrumentation; Radiography, Interventional - standards; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Workflow; Risk; Exposure; Radioprotection; Interventional electrophysiology; Radiation
• ISSN: 1099-5129; 1532-2092
• DOI: 10.1093/europace/eut409

Despite the advent of non-fluoroscopic technology, fluoroscopy remains the cornerstone of imaging in most interventional electrophysiological procedures, from diagnostic studies over ablation interventions to device implantation. Moreover, many patients receive additional X-ray imaging, such as cardiac computed tomography and others. More and more complex procedures have the risk to increase the radiation exposure, both for the patients and the operators. The professional lifetime attributable excess cancer risk may be around 1 in 100 for the operators, the same as for a patient undergoing repetitive complex procedures. Moreover, recent reports have also hinted at an excess risk of brain tumours among interventional cardiologists. Apart from evaluating the need for and justifying the use of radiation to assist their procedures, physicians have to continuously explore ways to reduce the radiation exposure. After an introduction on how to quantify the radiation exposure and defining its current magnitude in electrophysiology compared with the other sources of radiation, this position paper wants to offer some very practical advice on how to reduce exposure to patients and staff. The text describes how customization of the X-ray system, workflow adaptations, and shielding measures can be implemented in the cath lab. The potential and the pitfalls of different non-fluoroscopic guiding technologies are discussed. Finally, we suggest further improvements that can be implemented by both the physicians and the industry in the future. We are confident that these suggestions are able to reduce patient and operator exposure by more than an order of magnitude, and therefore think that these recommendations are worth reading and implementing by any electrophysiological operator in the field.