In plain language
In 1007 ablations at one cardiac centre, removing the anti-scatter grid and using ultra-low pulse rate fluoroscopy roughly halved patient radiation dose without longer screening times. Staff dose was not measured, though lower patient dose generally lowers scatter.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Prospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Patients, Phantom or simulation (no people)
- Size
- n = 1,007 procedures
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Dose area product fell significantly for simple ablations after removing the grid and using ultra-low pulsed fluoroscopy.
Key figures: 20.4±26.9 Gycm(2) vs 8.0±10.3 Gycm(2), p<0.00001
Dose area product also fell significantly for complex ablations, with no change in screening times.
Key figures: 63.3±50.1 Gycm(2) vs 32.8±31.7 Gycm(2), p<0.00001
Modelled lifetime fatal cancer risk to patients per million procedures dropped by about two-thirds.
Key figures: 182 to 68 (simple); 440 to 155 (complex) per million procedures
Limits to keep in mind
Single-centre before-after comparison rather than randomised; outcomes are patient dose area product and modelled cancer risk, with no direct measurement of operator or staff dose.
Related research summaries
- Two Central Nervous System Tumors in One Catheter Lab: Time to Rethink Radiation Protection (2026, Retrospective cohort study)
- Near zerO fluoroscopic exPosure during catheter ablAtion of supRavenTricular arrhYthmias: the NO-PARTY multicentre randomized trial (2015, Randomized trial)
- Sub-Zero: A Review of the Current Evidence and Evolving Technologies Enabling Zero‑Fluoroscopy Procedures (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)
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.