X-ray management in electrophysiology: a survey of the Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing (AIAC)

Occupational radiation exposure of electrophysiology staff with reproductive potential and during pregnancy: an EHRA survey

AIMS

Electrophysiology (EP) is a growing field in cardiology, with an increasing involvement of young people. Nevertheless, concerns about radiation exposure and its impact on reproduction and pregnancy may discourage the choice of an EP career. The study is aimed at investigating the level of awareness and main sources of concern about the effects of radiation on reproductive potential and pregnancy, exploring the safety measures adopted in different EP labs, and verifying the adherence to the current guidelines.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An online survey was conducted using the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) infrastructure from April to June 2022. A total of 252 EP personnel (42% women) participated, from 50 countries and different professional roles. Most participants expressed concerns regarding the effects of radiation on reproductive capacity (67.1%) and offspring diseases (68.2%). Only 37.9% of participants were aware of the EHRA 2017 consensus document about occupational radiation exposure. Most participants (80.9%) considered that occupational radiation during pregnancy is not safe. EP female staff were not allowed to work in the EP lab during pregnancy in 48.1% of cases. Zero-fluoroscopy was the preferred choice to continue working in the EP lab during pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

EP staff, including both men and women, have concerns about the effects of radiation on reproductive capacity. Despite the recommendations issued by international bodies, implementation of the policies regarding pregnancy and occupational radiation exposure is heterogeneous. Zero-fluoroscopy is the preferred approach to ensure safety during pregnancy in the EP lab.

Interventional cardiology and X-ray exposure of the head: overview of clinical evidence and practical implications

Interventional cardiologists are significantly exposed to X- rays and no dose of radiation may be considered well tolerated or harmless. Leaded aprons protect the trunk and the thyroid gland, leaded glasses protect the eyes. The operator's legs, arms, neck and head are, instead, not fully protected. In fact, the operator's brain remains the closest part to the primary X-ray beam and scatter in most interventional procedures and specifically the physician's front head is the most exposed region during device implantation performed at the patient's side. After the initial description of cases of brain and neck tumours, additional reports on head and neck malignancies have been published. Although a direct link between operator radiation exposure and brain cancer has not been established, these reports have heightened awareness of a potential association. The use of lead-based cranial dedicated shields may help reduce operator exposure but upward scattered radiation, weight and poor tolerability have raised concerns and hindered widespread acceptance. The purpose of this review is to describe current knowledge on occupational X-ray exposure of interventional cardiologists, with a special focus on the potential risks for the head and neck and efficacy of available protection devices.

Zero Fluoroscopy Arrhythmias Catheter Ablation: A Trend Toward More Frequent Practice in a High-Volume Center

Background

Awareness of radiation exposure risks associated to interventional cardiology procedures is growing. The availability of new technologies in electrophysiology laboratories has reduced fluoroscopy usage during arrhythmias ablations. The aim of this study was to describe procedures with and without X-Rays and to assess feasibility, safety, and short-term efficacy of zero fluoroscopy intervention in a high-volume center oriented to keep exposure to ionizing radiation as low as reasonably achievable.

Methods

Cardiac catheter ablations performed in our hospital since January 2017 to June 2021.

Results

A total of 1,853 procedures were performed with 1,957 arrhythmias treated. Rate of fluoroless procedures was 15.4% (285 interventions) with an increasing trend from 8.5% in 2017 to 22.9% of first semester 2021. The most frequent arrhythmia treated was atrial fibrillation (646; 3.6% fluoroless) followed by atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia (644; 16.9% fluoroless), atrial flutter (215; 8.8% fluoroless), ventricular tachycardia (178; 17.4% fluoroless), premature ventricular contraction (162; 48.1% fluoroless), and accessory pathways (112; 31.3% fluoroless). Although characteristics of patients and operative details were heterogeneous among treated arrhythmias, use of fluoroscopy did not influence procedure duration. Moreover, feasibility and efficacy were 100% in fluoroless ablations while the rate of major complications was very low and no different with or without fluoroscopy (0.45 vs. 0.35%).

Conclusion

Limiting the use of X-Rays is necessary, especially when the available technologies allow a zero-use approach. A lower radiation exposure may be reached, reducing fluoroscopy usage whenever possible during cardiac ablation procedures with high safety, full feasibility, and efficacy.