In plain language
In a randomized trial of 210 elective coronary angiograms by one operator, a pelvic lead shield on the patient cut measured operator dose by more than half for radial and femoral access, though radial access still gave higher operator dose.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Randomized trial
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Patients
- Size
- n = 210 patients
- Topics
- Room shielding and protective devicesDosimetry and monitoringDose reduction techniquesPersonal protective equipment
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
For radial access, pelvic lead shielding of the patient reduced operator dose by more than half.
Key figures: 20.9 ± 13.8 μSv to 9.0 ± 5.4 μSv, p < 0.0001
For femoral access, pelvic lead shielding reduced operator dose by about 80%.
Key figures: 15.3 ± 10.4 μSv to 2.9 ± 2.7 μSv, p < 0.0001
Dose-area product (DAP)-normalized operator dose fell with shielding by a similar amount for both access routes.
Key figures: radial 0.94 ± 0.28 to 0.39 ± 0.19; femoral 0.70 ± 0.26 to 0.16 ± 0.13 μSv × Gy(-1) × cm(-2)
Even with pelvic shielding, radial access was associated with higher operator dose than femoral access.
Limits to keep in mind
Single operator with one dosimeter outside the apron at chest level, so results may not generalize to other operators, staff or organ doses; abstract only, elective diagnostic angiography, country not stated.
Related research summaries
- Extended Protective Shield Under Table to Reduce Operator Radiation Dose in Percutaneous Coronary Procedures: The EXTRA-RAD Study (2019, Randomized trial)
- Determinants of operator and patient radiation exposure during cardiac catheterization: Insights from the RadiCure (RADIation reduction during cardiac catheterization using real-timE monitoring) trial (2015, Randomized trial)
- Obesity as a determinant of radiation burden in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (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.