Simple preoperative radiation safety interventions significantly lower radiation doses during central venous line placement in children

The Effect of Pre-Operative Verbal Confirmation for Interventional Radiology Physicians on Their Use of Personal Dosimeters and Personal Protective Equipment

Interventional radiology (IR) physicians must be equipped with personal passive dosimeters and personal protective equipment (PPE); however, they are inconsistently used. Therefore, we aimed to explore practical measures to increase PPE usage and ascertain whether these measures could lead to an actual decrease in exposure doses to IR physicians. Dosimeters and PPE were visually inspected. Then, a pre-operative briefing was conducted as a direct intervention, and the use of dosimeters and PPE was verbally confirmed. Finally, the intervention effect was verified by measuring the use rates and individual exposure doses. Because of the intervention, the use rate markedly improved and was almost 100%. However, both the effective dose rate (effective dose/fluoroscopy time) and the lens equivalent dose rate (lens equivalent dose/fluoroscopy time) showed that the intervention led to a statistically significant increase in exposure (effective dose rate: p = 0.033; lens equivalent dose rate: p = 0.003). In conclusion, the proper use of dosimeters and PPE raised the radiation exposure values for IR physicians immediately after the intervention, which was hypothesized to be due to the inclusion of exposure overlooked to date and the changes in the dosimeter management method from a single- to a double-dosimeter approach.

A decision tree to guide long term venous access placement in children and adolescents undergoing surgery for renal tumors

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

While many children with renal tumors require long term venous access (VA) for adjuvant chemotherapy, certainly not all do. This study develops and tests a VA decision tree (DT) to direct the placement of VA in patients with renal tumors.

METHODS

Utilizing data readily available at surgery a VADT was developed. The VADT was tested retrospectively by 2 independent reviewers on a historic cohort. The ability of the VADT to appropriately select which patients would benefit from VA placement was tested.

RESULTS

160 patients underwent renal tumor surgery between 2005 and 2018. 70 (43.8%) patients met study criteria with median age of 45.1 months (range 1.1-224); 73% required VA. Using the VADT, VA placement was "needed" in 67.1% of patients and "deferred" in 32.9%. Interrater reliability was very high (kappa = 0.97, 95% CI 0.91-1, p < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of the VADT to correctly decide on VA placement were 0.92 (0.8-0.98) and 1 (0.79-1). Using the VADT, no patient would have undergone unnecessary VA placement. In reality, 4.3% of patients had an unnecessary VA placed which required a subsequent removal.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary data support the continued study of this VADT to guide intraoperative decisions regarding VA placement in patients with renal tumors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III - Study of diagnostic test.