Operator Pelvic Radiation Exposure During Percutaneous Coronary Procedures

In plain language

In one interventional cardiologist's coronary procedures, dosimeter readings at the pelvis were about seven times higher than at the chest, regardless of radial or femoral access. This is a dose measurement, not a health outcome.

At a glance

Type of study: Original research, Prospective cohort study
Who was studied: Interventional cardiologists
Size: n = 138 procedures
Topics: Dosimetry and monitoring Pregnancy and reproductive health
Summary based on: the abstract

What it found

Operator pelvic dose was significantly higher than thorax dose during percutaneous coronary procedures.
Key figures: 40.1 μSv (IQR 22.7-76.3) pelvic vs 5.6 μSv (IQR 1.5-12) thorax; P<.001
The pelvic excess persisted after normalization by dose-area product.
Key figures: 2.98 μSv/Gy•cm² pelvic vs 0.33 μSv/Gy•cm² thorax; P<.001
Pelvic dose did not differ by vascular access site (right radial, left radial, femoral).
Key figures: 42 μSv vs 39 μSv vs 40 μSv; P=.43
Procedures had median fluoroscopy time 226 s and median dose-area product (DAP) 15.3 Gy•cm².
Key figures: 226 sec (IQR 117-407); 15.3 Gy•cm² (IQR 9.3-27.8)

Limits to keep in mind

Single operator at a single center with pelvic dosimetry in only 138 of 2028 procedures, and few femoral cases (15); the abstract does not state whether dosimeters were worn over or under protective garments.

Radiation Exposure and Protection for (Assumed) Pregnant Interventional Cardiologists and Electrophysiologists (2024, Dosimetry measurement study)
The occupational effects of interventional cardiology: results from the WIN for Safety survey (2012, Cross-sectional survey)
SCAI/ASE/HRS/SIR/SVS Expert Consensus Statement on Enhanced Radiation Protection: Time for Mandatory and Urgent Action (2026, Guideline or consensus statement)
Occupational Health Hazards in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: Results of the 2023 SCAI Survey (2025, Cross-sectional survey)
Radiation exposure in interventional cardiology: a narrative review of health effects and novel approaches to ensure radiation safety (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.