In plain language
This review estimates that interventional cardiologists receive about 50 to 100 microSv gonad dose under the apron per procedure, adding up to 0.5-1 Sv over a career, but evidence linking such doses to reproductive harm remains inconclusive.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Narrative review
- Who was studied
- Interventional cardiologists, Interventional radiologists, Patients
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
In interventional cardiologists, gonad dose under the lead apron is similar in magnitude to the shielded thyroid dose, about 50 to 100 microSv per cine-angiography procedure, and up to ten-fold higher for complex procedures.
Key figures: median 50 to 100 microSievert per procedure; ten-fold higher for complex procedures
Cumulative gonad exposure over a 30-year career is estimated at 0.5-1 Sv.
Key figures: 0.5-1 Sv over 30 years
Epidemiological evidence on reproductive effects at low-to-moderate doses is inconclusive and inadequate for evidence-based advice.
Interventional cardiology and radiology staff have professional exposures two to three times higher than diagnostic radiologists.
Key figures: two-to three times higher
Biomarkers of reproductive health (hormones, sperm quality, sperm DNA damage) are proposed for future research.
Key figures: < 1000 mSv
Limits to keep in mind
Narrative review summarised from the abstract only; dose figures are estimates compiled from other studies, and the health evidence reviewed is described as inconclusive.
Related research summaries
- IU Health Handbook of Fluoroscopy Safety (Guideline or consensus statement)
- Radiation exposure in interventional cardiology: a narrative review of health effects and novel approaches to ensure radiation safety (2025, Narrative review)
- Radiation Exposure, Training, and Safety in Cardiology (2024, Narrative review)
- 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)
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.