Radiation exposure to operating room personnel and patients during endovascular procedures

In plain language

In 39 fenestrated aortic repairs, dosimetry on the anesthesia equipment recorded higher doses than the operators. Staff dose tracked patient kerma-area product (KAP); shielding, fewer digital subtraction runs and avoiding lateral angulation were linked to lower measured dose.

At a glance

Type of study: Original research, Dosimetry measurement study
Who was studied: Vascular surgeons, Nurses, Radiologic technologists, Anesthesia staff, Patients
Size: n = 39 procedures
Topics: Dosimetry and monitoring Dose reduction techniques Room shielding and protective devices Personal protective equipment Patient dose
Summary based on: the abstract

What it found

The dosimeter on the anesthesia equipment received more radiation per case than the average operator, attributed to ineffective shielding; scrub nurse and technologist received less.
Key figures: anesthesia +143 μSv (38-247); scrub nurse -106 μSv (66-146); RT -100 μSv (55-145) vs average operator
Personnel doses correlated well with patient kerma area product but less with fluoroscopy time or cumulative air kerma.
Key figures: r = .82 operator, r = .85 scrub nurse, r = .86 anesthesia; all P < .001
During preoperative cone beam computed tomography (CT), shielding greatly reduced the technologist's dose.
Key figures: 1.1 μSv (0.6-1.5) shielded vs 37 μSv (22-53) unshielded
Operator dose rate was higher in lateral than posterior-anterior C-arm projection.
Key figures: 1.78 (1.37-2.31) times
After adjustment for lead aprons, average operator effective dose per case was low; digital subtraction acquisitions contributed a large share of doses.
Key figures: 38 μSv

Limits to keep in mind

Single procedure type (fenestrated aortic repair) with 39 cases, likely a single centre; dosimeter positions (e.g., on anesthesia equipment) may not reflect individual body doses.

Radiation Exposure To Operating Room Personnel And Patients During Endovascular Procedures (2013, Dosimetry measurement study)
ICRP Draft - Radiological Protection in Fluoroscopically Guided Procedures (Guideline or consensus statement)
Radiation Protection in Interventional Radiology (2022, Narrative review)
Radiation-Induced Noncancer Risks in Interventional Cardiology: Optimisation of Procedures and Staff and Patient Dose Reduction (2013, Narrative review)
AST Standards for Ionizing Radiation Exposure (Guideline or consensus statement)

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.