Operator Radiation Exposure Comparing the Left Radial Artery Approach and a Uniform Hyper-Adducted Right Radial Artery Approach: The HARRA Study.

IF 6.1 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Richard Casazza, Bilal Malik, Arsalan Hashmi, Joshua Fogel, Enrico Montagna, Robert Frankel, Elliot Borgen, Sergey Ayzenberg, Michael Friedman, Norbert Moskovits, Shivani Verma, Jamie Meng, Nailun Chang, Yili Huang, Carlos Rodriguez, Habib Hymie Chera, Shiv Raj, Saurav Chaterjee, Daren Gibson, Andres Palacios, Chirag Agarwal, Maria Victoria Nene, Jacob Shani
{"title":"Operator Radiation Exposure Comparing the Left Radial Artery Approach and a Uniform Hyper-Adducted Right Radial Artery Approach: The HARRA Study.","authors":"Richard Casazza, Bilal Malik, Arsalan Hashmi, Joshua Fogel, Enrico Montagna, Robert Frankel, Elliot Borgen, Sergey Ayzenberg, Michael Friedman, Norbert Moskovits, Shivani Verma, Jamie Meng, Nailun Chang, Yili Huang, Carlos Rodriguez, Habib Hymie Chera, Shiv Raj, Saurav Chaterjee, Daren Gibson, Andres Palacios, Chirag Agarwal, Maria Victoria Nene, Jacob Shani","doi":"10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radiation exposure is one of the most adverse occupational hazards faced by interventional cardiologists. Various arterial access sites have shown to yield different operator radiation exposure during diagnostic cardiac catheterization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center randomized controlled trial assessed the cumulative radiation exposure and normalized radiation exposure at 4 different anatomic locations (thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye) of the primary operator when using the left radial artery (LRA) approach compared with a uniform hyper-adducted right radial artery (HARRA) approach. Patients (n=534) were randomized to LRA (n=269) or HARRA (n=265). During diagnostic catheterization, real-time radiation dosimeters were placed on the thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye of each operator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cumulative radiation measurements were as follows: thorax (LRA, 9.66±8.57 microsieverts [μSv] versus HARRA, 12.27±7.09 μSv; <i>P</i><0.001); abdomen (LRA, 27.46±21.20 μSv versus HARRA, 36.56±23.72 μSv; <i>P</i><0.001); left eye (LRA, 2.65±2.59 μSv versus HARRA, 3.77±2.67 μSv; <i>P</i><0.001); and right eye (LRA, 1.13±1.69 μSv versus HARRA, 1.44±1.62 μSv; <i>P</i>=0.01). Normalized radiation measurements were: thorax (LRA, 0.38±0.35 versus HARRA, 0.49±0.24; <i>P</i><0.001); abdomen (LRA, 1.06±0.72 versus HARRA, 1.38±0.69; <i>P</i><0.001); left eye (LRA, 0.10±0.09 versus HARRA, 0.15±0.10; <i>P</i><0.001); and right eye: (LRA, 0.04±0.06 versus HARRA, 0.05±0.06; <i>P</i>=0.02). LRA had lower subclavian tortuosity than HARRA (15.6% versus 32.5%, <i>P</i><0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The LRA was associated with significantly less cumulative and normalized radiation exposure to the thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye of the primary operator compared with HARRA during diagnostic cardiac catheterization. Operators should consider using LRA more frequently than HARRA for diagnostic cardiac catheterization as this approach can reduce occupational radiation exposure.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05833516.</p>","PeriodicalId":10330,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":"e014602"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014602","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Radiation exposure is one of the most adverse occupational hazards faced by interventional cardiologists. Various arterial access sites have shown to yield different operator radiation exposure during diagnostic cardiac catheterization.

Methods: This single-center randomized controlled trial assessed the cumulative radiation exposure and normalized radiation exposure at 4 different anatomic locations (thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye) of the primary operator when using the left radial artery (LRA) approach compared with a uniform hyper-adducted right radial artery (HARRA) approach. Patients (n=534) were randomized to LRA (n=269) or HARRA (n=265). During diagnostic catheterization, real-time radiation dosimeters were placed on the thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye of each operator.

Results: Cumulative radiation measurements were as follows: thorax (LRA, 9.66±8.57 microsieverts [μSv] versus HARRA, 12.27±7.09 μSv; P<0.001); abdomen (LRA, 27.46±21.20 μSv versus HARRA, 36.56±23.72 μSv; P<0.001); left eye (LRA, 2.65±2.59 μSv versus HARRA, 3.77±2.67 μSv; P<0.001); and right eye (LRA, 1.13±1.69 μSv versus HARRA, 1.44±1.62 μSv; P=0.01). Normalized radiation measurements were: thorax (LRA, 0.38±0.35 versus HARRA, 0.49±0.24; P<0.001); abdomen (LRA, 1.06±0.72 versus HARRA, 1.38±0.69; P<0.001); left eye (LRA, 0.10±0.09 versus HARRA, 0.15±0.10; P<0.001); and right eye: (LRA, 0.04±0.06 versus HARRA, 0.05±0.06; P=0.02). LRA had lower subclavian tortuosity than HARRA (15.6% versus 32.5%, P<0.001).

Conclusions: The LRA was associated with significantly less cumulative and normalized radiation exposure to the thorax, abdomen, left eye, and right eye of the primary operator compared with HARRA during diagnostic cardiac catheterization. Operators should consider using LRA more frequently than HARRA for diagnostic cardiac catheterization as this approach can reduce occupational radiation exposure.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05833516.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
221
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, an American Heart Association journal, focuses on interventional techniques pertaining to coronary artery disease, structural heart disease, and vascular disease, with priority placed on original research and on randomized trials and large registry studies. In addition, pharmacological, diagnostic, and pathophysiological aspects of interventional cardiology are given special attention in this online-only journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信