In plain language
Among 244 French interventional radiologists and cardiologists, whole-body doses were low, but eye lens and hand doses were much higher; 1.6% exceeded the 20 mSv/year eye lens limit, and eye protection and dosimeter use were inconsistent.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Interventional radiologists, Interventional cardiologists
- Size
- n = 244 physicians
- Where
- France
- Topics
- Dosimetry and monitoringEye lens and cataractsPersonal protective equipmentRoom shielding and protective devicesTraining and educationSafety culture and compliance
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Median annual whole-body effective doses were low in both specialties, and no physician exceeded the category B threshold.
Key figures: 0.36 mSv/year (radiology) and 0.61 mSv/year (cardiology); none above 6 mSv/year
A small proportion of physicians exceeded the annual eye lens dose limit.
Key figures: 4 of 244 (1.6%) above 20 mSv/year
Extremity and eye lens exposures were substantially higher than whole-body exposures, especially in vascular radiology and coronary/valvular cardiology.
Eye protection was often not used by radiologists despite being widely available.
Key figures: 35% non-use among radiologists
Extremity and eye lens dosimeters were less often available than whole-body dosimeters, particularly in radiology, and were used less consistently.
Key figures: 67% (extremity) and 27% (eye lens) availability in radiology
Limits to keep in mind
Retrospective design relying on passive dosimetry records and reported practices; the dose analysis included only physicians reporting systematic or frequent dosimeter use, so doses may be underestimated or biased. Only physicians were studied, not nurses or technologists.
Related research summaries
- SCAI/ASE/HRS/SIR/SVS Expert Consensus Statement on Enhanced Radiation Protection: Time for Mandatory and Urgent Action (2026, Guideline or consensus statement)
- SCAI Multi-Society Position Statement on Occupational Health Hazards (2020, Guideline or consensus statement)
- Occupational radiation exposure to nursing staff during cardiovascular fluoroscopic procedures: A review of the literature (2018, Narrative review)
- Occupational Radiological Protection in Interventional Procedures, ICRP PUBLICATION 139 (2018, Guideline or consensus statement)
- Accidents of occupational exposure to ionizing radiation in radiology departments: risks, prevention, and management (2026, 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.