Personalized Feedback on Staff Dose in Fluoroscopy-Guided Interventions: A New Era in Radiation Dose Monitoring.

PURPOSE: Radiation safety and protection are a key component of fluoroscopy-guided interventions. We hypothesize that providing weekly personal dose feedback will increase radiation awareness and ultimately will lead to optimized behavior. Therefore, we designed and implemented a personalized feedback of procedure and personal doses for medical staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medical staff (physicians and technicians, n = 27) involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions were equipped with electronic personal dose meters (PDMs). Procedure dose data including the dose area product and effective doses from PDMs were prospectively monitored for each consecutive procedure over an 8-month period (n = 1082). A personalized feedback form was designed displaying for each staff individually the personal dose per procedure, as well as relative and cumulative doses. This study consisted of two phases: (1) 1-5th months: Staff did not receive feedback (n = 701) and (2) 6-8th months: Staff received weekly individual dose feedback (n = 381). An anonymous evaluation was performed on the feedback and occupational dose. RESULTS: Personalized feedback was scored valuable by 76% of the staff and increased radiation dose awareness for 71%. 57 and 52% reported an increased feeling of occupational safety and changing their behavior because of personalized feedback, respectively. For technicians, the normalized dose was significantly lower in the feedback phase compared to the prefeedback phase: [median (IQR) normalized dose (phase 1) 0.12 (0.04-0.50) µSv/Gy cm2 versus (phase 2) 0.08 (0.02-0.24) µSv/Gy cm2, p = 0.002]. CONCLUSION: Personalized dose feedback increases radiation awareness and safety and can be provided to staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions.

Fusion guidance in endovascular peripheral artery interventions: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of endovascular guidance by means of live fluoroscopy fusion with magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: Fusion guidance was evaluated in 20 endovascular peripheral artery interventions in 17 patients. Fifteen patients had received preinterventional diagnostic MRA and two patients had undergone CTA. Time for fluoroscopy with MRA/CTA coregistration was recorded. Feasibility of fusion guidance was evaluated according to the following criteria: for every procedure the executing interventional radiologists recorded whether 3D road-mapping provided added value (yes vs. no) and whether PTA and/or stenting could be performed relying on the fusion road-map without need for diagnostic contrast-enhanced angiogram series (CEAS) (yes vs. no). Precision of the fusion road-map was evaluated by recording maximum differences between the position of the vasculature on the virtual CTA/MRA images and conventional angiography. RESULTS: Average time needed for image coregistration was 5 ± 2 min. Three-dimensional road-map added value was experienced in 15 procedures in 12 patients. In half of the patients (8/17), intervention was performed relying on the fusion road-map only, without diagnostic CEAS. In two patients, MRA roadmap showed a false-positive lesion. Excluding three patients with inordinate movements, mean difference in position of vasculature on angiography and MRA/CTA road-map was 1.86 ± 0.95 mm, implying that approximately 95 % of differences were between 0 and 3.72 mm (2 ± 1.96 standard deviation). CONCLUSIONS: Fluoroscopy with MRA/CTA fusion guidance for peripheral artery interventions is feasible. By reducing the number of CEAS, this technology may contribute to enhance procedural safety.

Occupational Radiation Exposure During Endovascular Aortic Repair.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the radiation exposure to operating room personnel and to assess determinants for high personal doses during endovascular aortic repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Occupational radiation exposure was prospectively evaluated during 22 infra-renal aortic repair procedures (EVAR), 11 thoracic aortic repair procedures (TEVAR), and 11 fenestrated or branched aortic repair procedures (FEVAR). Real-time over-lead dosimeters attached to the left breast pocket measured personal doses for the first operators (FO) and second operators (SO), radiology technicians (RT), scrub nurses (SN), anesthesiologists (AN), and non-sterile nurses (NSN). Besides protective apron and thyroid collar, no additional radiation shielding was used. Procedural dose area product (DAP), iodinated contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, patient's body weight, and C-arm angulation were documented. RESULTS: Average procedural FO dose was significantly higher during FEVAR (0.34 ± 0.28 mSv) compared to EVAR (0.11 ± 0.21 mSv) and TEVAR (0.06 ± 0.05 mSv; p = 0.003). Average personnel doses were 0.17 ± 0.21 mSv (FO), 0.042 ± 0.045 mSv (SO), 0.019 ± 0.042 mSv (RT), 0.017 ± 0.031 mSv (SN), 0.006 ± 0.007 mSv (AN), and 0.004 ± 0.009 mSv (NSN). SO and AN doses were strongly correlated with FO dose (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001). There was a significant correlation between FO dose and procedural DAP (R = 0.69, p < 0.001), iodinated contrast volume (R = 0.67, p < 0.001) and left-anterior C-arm projections >60° (p = 0.02), and a weak correlation with fluoroscopy time (R = 0.40, p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Average FO dose was a factor four higher than SO dose. Predictors for high personal doses are procedural DAP, iodinated contrast volume, and left-anterior C-arm projections greater than 60°.

Radiation exposure of abdominal cone beam computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To evaluate patients radiation exposure of abdominal C-arm cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board; written, informed consent was waived. Radiation exposure of abdominal CBCT was evaluated in 40 patients who underwent CBCT during endovascular interventions. Dose area product (DAP) of CBCT was documented and effective dose (ED) was estimated based on organ doses using dedicated Monte Carlo simulation software with consideration of X-ray field location and patients' individual body weight and height. Weight-dependent ED per DAP conversion factors were calculated. CBCT radiation dose was compared to radiation dose of procedural fluoroscopy. CBCT dose-related risk for cancer was assessed. RESULTS: Mean ED of abdominal CBCT was 4.3 mSv (95 % confidence interval [CI] 3.9; 4.8 mSv, range 1.1-7.4 mSv). ED was significantly higher in the upper than in the lower abdomen (p = 0.003) and increased with patients' weight (r = 0.55, slope = 0.045 mSv/kg, p < 0.001). Radiation exposure of CBCT corresponded to the radiation exposure of on average 7.2 fluoroscopy minutes (95 % CI 5.5; 8.8 min) in the same region of interest. Lifetime risk of exposure related cancer death was 0.033 % or less depending on age and weight. CONCLUSIONS: Mean ED of abdominal CBCT was 4.3 mSv depending on X-ray field location and body weight.

Diagnosing intracranial aneurysms with MR angiography: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of MR angiography (MRA) in the diagnosis of ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on 4 electronic databases on relevant articles that were published from January 1998 to October 2013. Inclusion criteria were met by 12 studies that compared MRA with digital subtraction angiography as reference standard. Two independent reviewers evaluated the methodological quality of the studies. Data from eligible studies were extracted and used to construct 2×2 contingency tables on a per-aneurysm level. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were calculated for all studies and subgroups of studies. Heterogeneity was tested, and risk for publication bias was assessed. RESULTS: Included studies were of high methodological quality. Studies with larger sample size tended to have higher diagnostic performance. Most studies used time-of-flight MRA technique. Among the 960 patients assessed, 772 aneurysms were present. Heterogeneity with reference to sensitivity and specificity was moderate to high. Pooled sensitivity of MRA was 95% (95% confidence interval, 89%-98%), and pooled specificity was 89% (95% confidence interval, 80%-95%). False-negative and false-positive aneurysms detected on MRA were mainly located at the skull base and middle cerebral artery. Freehand 3-dimensional reconstructions performed by the radiologist significantly increased diagnostic performance. Studies performed on 3 Tesla showed a trend toward higher performance (P=0.054). CONCLUSIONS: Studies on diagnostic performance of MRA show high sensitivity with large variation in specificity in the detection of intracranial aneurysms.

Cost-effectiveness of CTA, MRA and DSA in patients with non-traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage.

OBJECTIVES: Intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and computed tomographic angiography (CTA) are imaging modalities used for diagnostic work-up of non-traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage. The aim of our study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of MRA, DSA and CTA in the first year after the bleed. METHODS: A decision model was used to calculate costs and benefits (in quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) that accrued to cohorts of 1,000 patients. Costs and characteristics of diagnostic tests, therapy, patients' quality of life and associated costs were respected. The diagnostic strategy with highest QALYs and lowest costs was considered most cost-effective. RESULTS: DSA was the most effective diagnostic option, yielding on average 0.6039 QALYs (95 % CI, 0.5761-0.6327) per patient, followed by CTA 0.5983 QALYs (95 % CI, 0.5704-0.6278) and MRA 0.5947 QALYs (95 % CI, 0.5674-0.6237). Cost was lowest for DSA (39,808 ; 95 % CI, 37,182-42,663), followed by CTA (40,748 ; 95 % CI, 37,937-43,831) and MRA (41,814 ; 95 % CI, 38,730-45,146). A strategy of CTA followed by DSA if CTA was negative or coiling deemed not feasible, was as effective as DSA alone at average costs of 39,767 (95 % CI, 36,903-42,402). CONCLUSION: A combined strategy of CTA and DSA was found to be the most cost-effective diagnostic approach. MAIN MESSAGES: • We defined a standard model for cost-effectiveness analysis in diagnostic imaging. • Comparing total 1-year health costs and benefits, CTA is superior to MRA. • A strategy of combining CTA and DSA was found to be the most cost-effective diagnostic approach.

Accuracy of computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography for diagnosing renal artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Timely, accurate detection of renal artery stenosis is important because this disorder may be a potentially curable cause of hypertension and renal impairment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity of computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) compared with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for detection of renal artery stenosis. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter comparative study conducted from 1998 to 2001. Two panels of 3 observers judged CTA and MRA image data and were blinded to all other results. Digital subtraction angiography images were evaluated by consensus. SETTING: 3 large teaching hospitals and 3 university hospitals in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 402 hypertensive patients with suspected renal artery stenosis were included. A group of 356 patients who underwent all 3 diagnostic tests was used for analysis. MEASUREMENTS: Reproducibility was assessed by calculating interobserver agreement. Diagnostic performance was evaluated in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and other diagnostic variables. Atherosclerotic stenoses of 50% or greater and fibromuscular dysplasia were considered clinically relevant. RESULTS: Twenty percent of patients who underwent all 3 tests had clinically relevant renal artery stenosis. Moderate interobserver agreement was found, with kappa values ranging from 0.59 to 0.64 for CTA and 0.40 to 0.51 for MRA. The combined sensitivity and specificity were 64% (95% CI, 55% to 73%) and 92% (CI, 90% to 95%) for CTA and 62% (CI, 54% to 71%) and 84% (CI, 81% to 87%) for MRA. LIMITATIONS: Eighteen percent of the patients were included nonconsecutively. Digital subtraction angiography may be an imperfect reference test. CONCLUSION: Computed tomographic angiography and MRA are not reproducible or sensitive enough to rule out renal artery stenosis in hypertensive patients. Therefore, DSA remains the diagnostic method of choice. *For a list of the other investigators and research coordinators who participated in RADISH, see the Appendix.