In plain language
In 42 interventional cardiologists and electrophysiologists at one US center, abdominal exposure behind 0.5 mm Pb-equivalent material over 40 weeks was about 0.22 mGy, implying estimated fetal doses well below US and international limits. Sex, height and role did not affect exposure.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Dosimetry measurement study
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Electrophysiologists, Trainees
- Size
- n = 42 cardiologists
- Where
- United States
- Topics
- Pregnancy and reproductive healthPersonal protective equipmentDosimetry and monitoringWomen in the fieldWorkforce and careers
- Summary based on
- the full text
What it found
Median 40-week abdominal exposure behind 0.5 mm Pb equivalent material was very low.
Key figures: 0.22 mGy (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.05-0.83)
Estimated fetal dose was well below National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) (5 mSv) and International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) (1 mSv) limits, and below natural background over 40 weeks.
Key figures: 0.11 mSv (95th % 0.42 mSv) with 0.5 mm; 0.26 mSv (95th % 1.0 mSv) with 0.25 mm
Exposure transmitted through protective material fell with thickness; relative to shoulder, unshielded abdomen was 2.21x and 0.5 mm-shielded abdomen 0.09x.
Key figures: 0 mm 2.21; 0.25 mm 0.20; 0.35 mm 0.13; 0.5 mm 0.09 (all P < .001)
Physician sex, height, role and specialty did not significantly influence abdominal exposure.
Key figures: sex female vs male 1.16 (0.68-2.00), P = .57
Materials from two vendors differed across thicknesses but not at 0.5 mm.
Key figures: 1.69 (1.15-2.50), P = .01; at 0.5 mm 0.88, P > .999
Limits to keep in mind
Single-center study with dosimeters taped outside garments, mostly non-pregnant participants, and 6-month readings extrapolated to 40 weeks; shield use and positioning were uncontrolled, and fetal dose was estimated rather than measured.
Related research summaries
- Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology (2024, Narrative review)
- Occupational Health Hazards in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: Results of the 2023 SCAI Survey (2025, Cross-sectional survey)
- Occupational exposure to ionizing radiation in pregnant staff: Consensus document (Spanish societies) (2023, Guideline or consensus statement)
- SCAI Multi-Society Position Statement on Occupational Health Hazards (2020, Guideline or consensus statement)
- Occupational Pelvic and Chest-Level Radiation Exposure Among Interventional Echocardiographers During Percutaneous Structural Heart Interventions (2026, Dosimetry measurement study)
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.