Investigation of radiation dose around C-arm fluoroscopy and relevant cancer risk to operating room staff

Low-dose pulsed vs standard pulsed fluoroscopy during ERCP to reduce radiation without change in image quality: Prospective randomized study

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) poses the risk of radiation exposure (RE) to patients and staff and increases the risk of adverse biological effects such as cataracts, sterility, and cancer. Newer fluoroscopy equipment (C-Arm) provides options to limit radiation in the form of lower radiation dose and frame rate or time-limited "pulsed" settings. However, the impact of lower settings on image quality has not been assessed, and no standard protocol exists for fluoroscopy settings used during ERCP. Patients and methods This was a single-center, double-blind, prospective randomized study of consecutive adult patients undergoing standard-of-care ERCP at a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were randomized into two groups: 1) standard-dose pulsed and 2) low-dose pulsed. Pulsed mode (8 fps) was defined as x-ray exposure either in the manufacturer standard-dose or low-dose settings limited to 3 seconds each time the foot-operated switch was depressed. Results Seventy-eight patients undergoing ERCP were enrolled and randomized. No difference in age, gender, or body mass index was found between the two groups. No significant difference in image quality was found between standard-dose and low-dose fluoroscopy P = 0.925). The low-dose group was exposed to significantly less radiation when compared with standard-dose P < 0.05). Fluoroscopy time (minutes) was similar in both groups (2.0 vs 1.9), further suggesting that group assignment had no impact on image quality or procedure time. Conclusions Low-dose pulsed fluoroscopy is a reliable method that substantially reduces radiation without compromising image quality or affecting procedure or fluoroscopy times. This underscores the need for standardization in ERCP fluoroscopy settings to limit radiation exposure.

Do Flat Panel Detector C-Arms Decrease Radiation Exposure Compared to Conventional Image Intensifiers?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the radiation dose and image quality between flat panel detector (FPD) and traditional image intensifier (II) C-arms at their lowest radiation settings.

METHODS

In a ureteroscopy simulation using a cadaver model, the radiation exposure was compared between FPD and II at 4 pulses-per-second (pps) using both low dose and automatic exposure control (AEC) settings. Additionally, the lowest dose settings for each machine were compared (4 pps with low dose in the FPD and 1 pps with low dose in the II). Five trials of 5 minutes were conducted for each setting. Four new optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters were used in each trial to record radiation exposure. Ten blinded urologists completed a survey rating image quality for each setting.

RESULTS

When comparing the FPD and II at their lowest possible settings, the FPD produced significantly more radiation (P <.05). Using both machines at 4 pps in low dose mode resulted in no significant difference between C-arms (P >.05). Conversely, operating the C-arms at 4 pps and AEC resulted in significantly higher radiation exposure from the FPD compared to the II (P <.05). There was no significant difference in image quality at each setting.

CONCLUSION

FPDs produce significantly more radiation at the lowest settings compared to IIs. Surgeons should employ IIs when reducing radiation exposure as low as possible is imperative, such as when operating on pediatric and pregnant patients.

Implementation of a Specific Set of Intraoperative C-Arm Fluoroscopy Terminologies in Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

OBJECTIVE

Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is currently the primary minimally invasive surgical approach for treating vertebral compression fractures caused by senile osteoporosis. The current existing problem is the lack of research on the application of a specific set of intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopy terminologies in PVP. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the use of a specific set of intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopic terminologies in PVP in order to increase fluoroscopy accuracy, decrease fluoroscopy frequencies and ray protection, and minimize operation times through rapid preoperative training of surgeons and radiographers.

METHODS

Spine surgeons and radiographers with at least 5 years of experience from nine different hospitals were randomly selected for a series of specialized intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopy terminology training between October 2018 and December 2021. Before and after the training, they were surveyed using a five-point Likert scale to statistically compare their knowledge of the terminology. Simultaneously, 190 PVP cases completed by these surgeons and radiographers before and after the training were chosen for comparison and analysis of fluoroscopy times, effective fluoroscopy rate, fluoroscopy time, repeated puncture rate, and other indicators before and after receiving specialized terminology training. Two-sample tests were mainly used to investigate differences in answers between surgeons and radiographers.

RESULTS

After the training, there was a notable improvement in the fluency of intraoperative communication between professional spine surgeons and radiographers. By comparing the indicators of pre-training with post-training, the effective anteroposterior fluoroscopy rate increased from 46.5% to 75.7%; the effective lateral fluoroscopy rate increased from 59.8% to 76.9%. Moreover, a notable decrease in communication barriers, fluoroscopy frequencies, fluoroscopy time, and the rate of repeated punctures, and a notable increase in the effective fluoroscopy rate was observed.

CONCLUSION

Smooth intraoperative communication between professional spine surgeons and radiographers can significantly lower the communication barrier, reduce the fluoroscopy frequencies and time, the rate of repeated puncture, and increase the effective fluoroscopy rate, all of which are important in improving the fluoroscopy in PVP.

Which of the three different intramedullary nail designs is superior in the treatment of femoral shaft fractures?

Aim: The aim of this study a retrospective comparison was the clinical and radiological results results of patients with femoral shaft fracture made oftreated with three different types of intramedullary nail (IMN). Material and Method: The study included 54 patients operated on in our clinic because of femoral shaft fracture. The records were retrospectively examined of 18 patients applied with locked IMN (LIMN), 17 with blade expandable IMN (BEIMN), and 19 with talon distalfix IMN (TDIMN). The groups were compared statistically in respect of age, gender, BMI, affected side, operating time (mins), radiation exposure (number of shots), time to union (weeks), visual analog scale (VAS) score, soft tissue problems associated with implant irritation, amount of shortening (mm), coronal, sagittal and torsional angulation (degrees). Results: The mean VAS score of the TDIMN group was determined to be statistically significantly higher than that of the LIMN and BEIMN groups (p=0.008, p=0.045). The operating times were similar in the BEIN and TDIMN groups (p=0.768) and significantly shorter than in the LIMN group (p