In plain language
In a Japanese multicenter survey of catheter ablation, median patient reference air kerma was 128 mGy for non-pulmonary vein isolation (PVI), 170 mGy for catheter PVI and 228 mGy for balloon PVI. These are patient dose indices, not measured staff exposure.
At a glance
- Type of study
- Original research, Retrospective cohort study
- Who was studied
- Patients
- Where
- Japan
- Summary based on
- the abstract
What it found
Median patient reference air kerma differed by ablation technique, highest for balloon PVI.
Key figures: Median Ka,r 128 mGy (non-PVI), 170 mGy (catheter PVI), 228 mGy (balloon PVI)
Kerma-area product (PKA), fluoroscopy time, cine runs and cine frames differed significantly among the three techniques.
Key figures: p<0.05
Radiation dose in catheter ablation showed a downward trend, though balloon PVI remained higher than other methods.
Authors recommend continuous dose monitoring and use of the data for future diagnostic reference level (DRL) revisions.
Limits to keep in mind
Retrospective nationwide survey summarised only in an abstract; number of institutions and procedures not reported. Measures patient dose indices, not staff dose.
Related research summaries
- Two Central Nervous System Tumors in One Catheter Lab: Time to Rethink Radiation Protection (2026, Retrospective cohort study)
- Establishing updated diagnostic reference levels for interventional radiology: a national Italian survey incorporating procedure complexity indices - Part II: interventional neuroradiology (2026, Dosimetry measurement study)
- Radiation dose reference levels for the most common image-guided interventional cardiac electrophysiology and pacing procedures: a French multicentre survey (2026, Cross-sectional survey)
- Investigation Of Reference Levels And Radiation Dose Associated With Abdominal EVAR (Endovascular Aneurysm Repair) Procedures Across Several European Centres (2017, Retrospective cohort study)
- Patient dose in interventional radiology: a multicentre study of the most frequent procedures in France (2017, Retrospective cohort study)
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.