Stéphane Manzo-Silberman1, MD, MSc; Emanuela Piccaluga2, MD; Maria D. Radu3, MD, PhD; Stefan K. James4, MD; Stefanie Schüpke5, MD, PhD; Beatriz Vaquerizo6, MD; Vijay Kunadian7, MD, FRCP, MBBS; Piera Capranzano8, MD; Julinda Mehilli9, MD; Gill Louise Buchanan10, MBChB, MSc, FRCP; Alaide Chieffo11, MD; Josepa Mauri12, MD, PhD
1. Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France; 2. ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy; 3. The Heart Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; 4. Department of Cardiology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; 5. Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Munich, Germany; 6. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain; 7. Cardiothoracic Centre, Newcastle upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom; 8. University of Catania, Catania, Italy; 9. Department of Cardiology, Zentralklinik Bad Berka, Bad Berka, Germany; 10. Department of Cardiology, North Cumbria University Hospitals, Carlisle, United Kingdom; 11. San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; 12. Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
From the previous survey performed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions Women Committee1, it appears that both women and men consider that the overall risk linked to radiation exposure hampers women from a career in interventional cardiology. Interventional cardiologists (IC) are exposed at the highest levels of radiation registered amongst medical staff using X-rays2.
Despite a specific definition of the safe dose limit and protective strategies for the foetus3,4,5,6, the “risk of pregnancy” is often evoked as a reason for not pursuing an interventional career, or to justify not choosing young women ...