Research paper by Efthymiou F, Metaxas V, Dimitroukas C, et al.

Indexed on: 12 Aug '21Published on: 18 Jun '21Published in: Radiation protection dosimetry


This study aims to evaluate patient radiation dose during fluoroscopically guided endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) procedures. Fluoroscopy time (FT) and kerma-area product (KAP) were recorded from 87 patients that underwent EVAR procedures with a mobile C-arm fluoroscopy system. Effective dose (ED) and organs’ doses were calculated utilising appropriate conversion coefficients based on the recorded KAP values. Entrance surface dose (ESD) was calculated based on KAP values and technical parameters. The mean FT was 22.7 min (range 6.4–76.8 min), resulting in a mean KAP of 36.6 Gy cm2 (range 2.0–167.8 Gy cm2), a mean ED of 6.2 mSv (range 0.3–28.5 mSv) and a mean ESD of 458 mGy (range 26–2098 mGy). The corresponding median values were 17.4 min, 25.6 Gy cm2, 4.4 mSv and 320 mGy. The threshold of 2 Gy for skin erythema was exceeded in two procedures for a focus-to-skin distance (FSD) of 40 cm and six procedures when an FSD of 30 cm was considered. The highest doses absorbed by the adrenals, kidneys, spleen and pancreas and ranged between 3.7 and 313.3 mGy (average 66.8 mGy), 3.3 and 285.1 mGy (average 60.8 mGy), 1.3 and 111.1 mGy (average 23.7 mGy), 1.1 and 92.1 mGy (average 19.6 mGy), respectively. A wide range of patient doses was reported in the literature. The radiation dose received by the patients was comparative or lower than most of the previously reported values. However, higher doses can be revealed due to the X-ray system’s non-optimum use and extended FTs, mainly affected by complex clinical conditions, patients’ body habitus and vascular surgeon experience. The large variation of patient doses highlights the potential to optimise the EVAR procedure by considering the balance between the radiation dose and the required image quality. Additional studies need to be conducted in increasing the vascular surgeons’ awareness regarding patient dose and radiation protection issues during EVAR procedures.