Keywords:
Cardiac, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, Fluoroscopy, Radiation safety, Comparative studies
Authors:
M. Dehairs, H. Bosmans, W. Desmet, N. Bergans, M. Vanesch, N. Marshall; Leuven/BE
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2019/C-2852
Results
Averaged over a 5 month period (July-November) following the changes,
DAP per exam decreased by 27% and 37% for systems A and B respectively,
compared to the 12 months prior the protocol change (System A: Fig. 1,
System B: Fig. 2 ).
Similarly,
looking at the median values instead of the mean values gave similar results,
with a decrease of 33% and 35% for both rooms.
Comparable results were found when looking at the PSD instead of the DAP values,
with a decrease of 34% and 29% for system A and B respectively.
(All changes were significant: p-value<0.05).
The reduction in entrance dose rate from the standard program to the low dose program,
measured with the PMMA phantom on the Siemens Artis Q,
was 32% and 20% for fluoroscopy and acquisition respectively,
which matches the reduction seen in the DAP values.
Discussion with the medical personnel,
did not reveal any complaints about image quality.
Looking at the average procedure time,
a small decrease in mean acquisition time and fluoroscopy time was found for both systems.
Fluoroscopy time decreased by 16% and 24% and acquisition time decreased by 6% and 14% for system A and B respectively.
This might indicate that the procedures in this period were somewhat easier on average which could account for some part of the reduction in dose but not completely.
For system A,
the operators switched back to medium dose in 2% and 5% of cases for fluoroscopy and acquisition respectively,
while for system B,
they switched back in 18% and 14% of cases (System A: Table 1,
System B: Table 2).
This follows the expectations,
as system B is typically used for more complex procedures. Further analysis the coming months should help to clarify whether the decrease in DAP will hold or whether it will increase again to the previous level.