2. Kardiologie I, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, and DZHK Standort Rhein-Main, Germany, Germany
As a public service to our readership, this article - peer reviewed by the Editors of EuroIntervention - has been published immediately upon acceptance as it was received. The content of this article is the sole responsibility of the authors, and not that of the journal or its publishers.
Please note that supplementary movies are not available online at this stage. Once a paper is published in its edited and formatted form, it will be accompanied online by any supplementary movies.
To read the full content of this article, please log in to download the PDF.
Methods and results:— In an all-comer randomized trial, consecutive coronary radial diagnostic and intervention procedures were assigned in 1:1:1 ratio to shield-only protection (shield group), shield and overlapping 0.5mm Pb panel curtain (shield+curtain group) or shield, curtain and additional 75x40cm, 0.5mm Pb drape placed across the waist of the patient (shield+curtain+drape group).A total of 614 radial procedures were randomized (n=193 shield, n=220 shield+curtain, n=201 shield+curtain+drape). There were no differences among groups in patients’ or procedural characteristics. The primary endpoint (relative exposure ratio between operator’s exposure in μSv and patient exposure, dose area product in cGy·cm2) was significantly lower in the shield+curtain+drape group for both first operator (20% reduction vs shield, 16% vs shield+curtain, p=0.025) and assistant (39% reduction vs shield, 25% vs shield+curtain, p=0.009).
Conclusions:— The use of an additional drape reduced radiation exposure of both the first and second operator during routine radial procedures; a shield-attached curtain alone was only partially effective.
Sign in to read and download the full articleForgot your password?
Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com