In plain language
In 420 coronary angiograms and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) by four interventional cardiologists using a lead apron, low leaded flaps and leaded glass, radial access was associated with higher operator dosimeter readings, higher patient dose and longer fluoroscopy times than femoral access.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Dosimetry measurement study
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Patients
- Size
- n = 420 procedures
- Topics
- Dosimetry and monitoringPersonal protective equipmentRoom shielding and protective devicesPatient dose
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Operator radiation exposure during coronary angiograms was significantly higher with radial than with femoral access.
Key figures: 29.0 [1.0-195.0] microSv vs. 13.0 [1.0-164.0] microSv; P < 0.0001
Operator exposure for angiograms followed by ad hoc PCI was also higher with radial access.
Key figures: 69.5 [4.0-531.0] microSv vs. 41.0 [2.0-360.0] microSv; P = 0.018
Higher operator exposure with radial access occurred despite use of a lead apron, low leaded flaps and leaded glass.
Patient radiation exposure was significantly higher with radial access for both procedure types.
Procedure durations and fluoroscopy times were longer with radial access.
Limits to keep in mind
Non-randomized registry comparison involving only four interventional cardiologists, with country and number of centres not stated in the abstract. Dosimeter readings are dose measures rather than health outcomes, and longer radial fluoroscopy times may partly explain the access-route difference.
Related research summaries
- Determinants of operator and patient radiation exposure during cardiac catheterization: Insights from the RadiCure (RADIation reduction during cardiac catheterization using real-timE monitoring) trial (2015, Randomized trial)
- Obesity as a determinant of radiation burden in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (2026, 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 in Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (2025, Narrative review)
- Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology (2024, Narrative review)
How this summary was made
ORSIF prepared this summary with AI assistance from the abstract 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.