Congress:
ECR25
Poster Number:
ESI-14194
Type:
EuroSafe Imaging Poster
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2025/ESI-14194
Authorblock:
M. Ostadi Ataabadi1, J. Rübenthaler1, J. Ricke1, M. B. Steinberger1, C. Ramsl2, M. Ingrisch1, R. S. Stahl1; 1Munich/DE, 2Vienna/AT
Disclosures:
Maryam Ostadi Ataabadi:
Nothing to disclose
Johannes Rübenthaler:
Nothing to disclose
Jens Ricke:
Nothing to disclose
Maria Barbara Steinberger:
Nothing to disclose
Christian Ramsl:
Nothing to disclose
Michael Ingrisch:
Nothing to disclose
Robert Stephan Stahl:
Nothing to disclose
Keywords:
Radiation physics, Radioprotection / Radiation dose, CT, Fluoroscopy, Comparative studies, Dosimetry, Dosimetric comparison
- Staff members reported no inconvenience associated with wearing real-time dosimeters, indicating the feasibility of the method for routine clinical practice.
- For general radiological angiographies the median of the total accumulated dose for the intervention team was higher than for all other procedures (Fig. 3).
Fig 3: Accumulated dose per procedure by type of intervention. P-values from Dunn’s test are given if p < 0.05. (General radiological angiographies (ANG), catheterization laboratory (Cath Lab), neuroradiology (NRAD) and CT-guided interventions (CTI)). - The median doses of physicians across all interventions were higher than that of radiology technicians (Fig. 4).
- The median accumulated doses of interventionists were significantly higher than that of every other professional role across all interventions (Fig. 4).
Fig 4: Accumulated dose per procedure by professional role across all interventions. (Interventionists (IR), radiology residents (RR), first and second radiology technicians (RT1, RT2)). - Several upward outliers were present in the accumulated dose per intervention for each occupational role, with interventionists exhibiting by far the most pronounced outliers. Overall, the largest outliers are observed in general angiography (Fig. 5).
- For general radiological angiographies, the median dose of RT2 was higher than that of RT1, despite RT2 predominantly having a supporting role during procedures. The median dose of RT2 also exhibited a pronounced increase compared its value across all interventions (Fig. 5). This increase was sufficient to raise the median dose of RT2 across all interventions above that of RT1, despite RT2 having a lower or equal median dose than RT1 for all other types of procedures. (See e.g. the radiation exposures by professional role in the cath lab (Fig. 6).)
Fig 5: Accumulated dose per procedure by professional role for general radiological angiographies.
Fig 6: Accumulated dose per procedure by professional role in the catheterization laboratory.
The higher exposure of RT2 appears to be linked to frequent movement within the interventional suite, resulting in a prolonged time spent in areas with reduced protective shielding. In addition, RT2 was not shielded from radiation by other persons in these areas, further contributing to the increased exposure (Fig.7). 
Fig 7: The movement of personnel within the intervention suite can lead to a substantial increase in dose, as it can decrease the effect of shielding by protective equipment and by other persons.