In plain language
In 766 coronary procedures at one Dutch centre, cardiology fellows had 34% higher chest-level dosimeter exposure per unit of patient dose than staff interventional cardiologists, although staff received more absolute dose because they performed more complex cases.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Dosimetry measurement study
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Trainees
- Size
- n = 766 procedures
- Where
- Netherlands
- Topics
- Dosimetry and monitoringTraining and educationSafety culture and complianceDose reduction techniquesPatient dose
- Summary based on
- the full text
What it found
After correcting for procedure complexity (E/dose-area product (DAP)), fellows-in-training had higher relative exposure than staff interventional cardiologists.
Key figures: 34% higher relative exposure (p = 0.025)
Staff interventional cardiologists performed more complex procedures and used more radiation (DAP) than fellows.
Key figures: 74% higher DAP
Staff interventional cardiologists received higher absolute operator exposure at chest height.
Key figures: 50% higher actual exposure
The newer X-ray system with noise reduction lowered radiation use and operator exposure during diagnostic angiograms.
Key figures: 65% lower radiation use; 63% lower operator exposure (both p < 0.001)
Radial access was not associated with higher relative radiation exposure.
Key figures: p = 0.16
Limits to keep in mind
Single-centre, 4-month observational sub-analysis of a drape trial with only 129 fellow-performed procedures and a single chest-height dosimeter; the behavioural explanations for fellows' higher relative exposure were hypothesised, not measured.
Related research summaries
- Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology (2024, Narrative review)
- Radiation protection practices in diagnostic and interventional cardiology: Position paper from Portuguese Association of Interventional Cardiology (2025, Guideline or consensus statement)
- Radiation safety program for the cardiac catheterization laboratory (2011, Guideline or consensus statement)
- AST Standards for Ionizing Radiation Exposure (Guideline or consensus statement)
- ICRP Draft - Radiological Protection in Fluoroscopically Guided Procedures (Guideline or consensus statement)
How this summary was made
ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the full text of the paper. A program then checked that the passage supporting each finding appears word for word in that source. A person has not yet reviewed each summary, so read the original before relying on a number. ORSIF summarizes research and does not endorse any product or company. Report a problem with this summary.
Prepared November 3, 2026.