In plain language
In 84 coronary intervention patients at one Japanese centre, fluoroscopy at 7.5 rather than 15 frames per second was associated with about 25% lower air kerma, without longer fluoroscopy time. Staff dose was not measured.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Patients
- Size
- n = 84 patients
- Where
- Japan
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Total air kerma at the interventional reference point was significantly lower with 7.5 frames per second fluoroscopy than with 15 frames per second.
Key figures: 701.4±427.9 vs. 936.8±623.9 mGy, p=0.02
Contrast volume and fluoroscopy time did not differ between frame-rate groups.
Authors conclude low frame rate fluoroscopy is safe, feasible and an easy strategy to reduce patient radiation during coronary intervention.
Key figures: 7.5 frames per second
Limits to keep in mind
Small single-centre retrospective, non-randomised comparison of 84 patients; only patient dose metrics were measured, with no staff dosimetry or clinical outcome data beyond feasibility.
Related research summaries
- Fluoroscopy-minimization strategy for catheter ablation of Supraventricular Tachycardia by wOmen OPerators: the STOOP Multicentre Registry (2026, Prospective cohort study)
- Two Central Nervous System Tumors in One Catheter Lab: Time to Rethink Radiation Protection (2026, Retrospective cohort study)
- Radiation Awareness for EVAR in Hybrid Operating Room: An Instant Operator Risk Chart (2021, Dosimetry measurement study)
- Utilization of a Radiation Safety Time-Out Reduces Radiation Exposure During Electrophysiology Procedures (2019, Prospective cohort study)
- Completely nonfluoroscopic catheter ablation of left atrial arrhythmias and ventricular tachycardia (2018, Case report or series)
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.