Reference Levels for Patient Radiation Doses in Interventional Radiology: Proposed Initial Values for U.S. Practice

Sufficient data exist to permit an initial proposal of values for reference levels for interventional radiologic procedures in the United States.

Purpose

To propose initial values for patient reference levels for fluoroscopically guided procedures in the United States.

Materials and Methods

This secondary analysis of data from the Radiation Doses in Interventional Radiology Procedures (RAD-IR) study was conducted under a protocol approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant. Dose distributions (percentiles) were calculated for each type of procedure in the RAD-IR study where there were data from at least 30 cases. Confidence intervals for the dose distributions were determined by using bootstrap resampling. Weight banding and size correction methods for normalizing dose to patient body habitus were tested.

Results

The different methods for normalizing patient radiation dose according to patient weight gave results that were not significantly different (P > .05). The 75th percentile patient radiation doses normalized with weight banding were not significantly different from those that were uncorrected for body habitus. Proposed initial reference levels for various interventional procedures are provided for reference air kerma, kerma-area product, fluoroscopy time, and number of images.

Conclusion

Sufficient data exist to permit an initial proposal of values for reference levels for interventional radiologic procedures in the United States. For ease of use, reference levels without correction for body habitus are recommended. A national registry of radiation-dose data for interventional radiologic procedures is a necessary next step to refine these reference levels.

© RSNA, 2009

Supplemental material: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.2533090354/-/DC1

References

  • 1 Wall BF , Shrimpton PC . The historical development of reference doses in diagnostic radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 1998;80:15–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging: review and additional advice. Ann ICRP 2001;31:33–52. http://www.icrp.org/docs/DRL_for_web.pdf. Accessed May 18, 2009. Google Scholar
  • 3 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 1991;21:1–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 International Atomic Energy Agency . International basic safety standards for protection against ionizing radiation and the safety of radiation sources. Safety series no. 115. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency, 1996. Google Scholar
  • 5 Valentin J . Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures. Ann ICRP 2000;30:7–67. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hirshfeld JW , Balter S , Brinker JA , et al.. ACCF/AHA/HRS/SCAI clinical competence statement on physician knowledge to optimize patient safety and image quality in fluoroscopically guided invasive cardiovascular procedures: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task Force on Clinical Competence and Training. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:2259–2282. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Amis ES , Butler PF , Applegate KE , et al.. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007;4:272–284. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Radiological protection and safety in medicine: a report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 1996;26:1–47. [Published correction appears in Ann ICRP 1997;27:61.] CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37:1–332. Google Scholar
  • 10 Gray JE , Archer BR , Butler PF , et al.. Reference values for diagnostic radiology: application and impact. Radiology 2005;235:354–358. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 11 American College of Radiology . ACR practice guideline for diagnostic reference levels in medical x-ray imaging. In: Practice guidelines and technical standards 2008. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2008. http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality_safety/guidelines/med_phys.aspx. Accessed May 18, 2009. Google Scholar
  • 12 Balter S , Miller DL , Vano E , et al.. A pilot study exploring the possibility of establishing guidance levels in x-ray directed interventional procedures. Med Phys 2008;35:673–680. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Peterzol A , Quai E , Padovani R , Bernardi G , Kotre CJ , Dowling A . Reference levels in PTCA as a function of procedure complexity. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005;117:54–58. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Neofotistou V , Vano E , Padovani R , et al.. Preliminary reference levels in interventional cardiology. Eur Radiol 2003;13:2259–2263. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Vano E , Sanchez R , Fernandez JM , et al.. Patient dose reference levels for interventional radiology: a national approach. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2009;32:19–24. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Vano E , Segarra A , Fernandez JM , et al.. A pilot experience launching a national dose protocol for vascular and interventional radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:46–49. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Verdun FR , Aroua A , Trueb PR , Vock P , Valley JF . Diagnostic and interventional radiology: a strategy to introduce reference dose level taking into account the national practice. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005;114:188–191. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Tsalafoutas IA , Goni H , Maniatis PN , Pappas P , Bouzas N , Tzortzis G . Patient doses from noncardiac diagnostic and therapeutic interventional procedures. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2006;17:1489–1498. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Vano E , Järvinen H , Kosunen A , et al.. Patient dose in interventional radiology: a European survey. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:39–45. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hart D , Hillier MC , Wall BF . National reference doses for common radiographic, fluoroscopic and dental x-ray examinations in the UK. Br J Radiol 2009;82:1–12. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Aroua A , Rickli H , Stauffer JC , et al.. How to set up and apply reference levels in fluoroscopy at a national level. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1621–1633. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hart D , Wall BF . The UK national patient dose database: now and in the future. Br J Radiol 2003;76:361–365. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Marshall NW , Chapple CL , Kotre CJ . Diagnostic reference levels in interventional radiology. Phys Med Biol 2000;45:3833–3846. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Miller DL , Balter S , Cole PE , et al.. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study. I. Overall measures of dose. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14:711–727. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Miller DL , Balter S , Cole PE , et al.. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study. II. Skin dose. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14:977–990. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Balter S , Miller DL , Schueler BA , et al.. Radiation doses in interventional radiology procedures: the RAD-IR study. III. Dosimetric performance of the interventional fluoroscopy units. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2004;15:919–926. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fletcher DW , Miller DL , Balter S , Taylor MA . Comparison of four techniques to estimate radiation dose to skin during angiographic and interventional radiology procedures. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2002;13:391–397. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Miller DL , Balter S , Wagner LK , et al.. Quality improvement guidelines for recording patient radiation dose in the medical record. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2004;15:423–429. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Balter S . Capturing patient doses from fluoroscopically based diagnostic and interventional systems. Health Phys 2008;95:535–540. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 30 International Electrotechnical Commission . Medical electrical equipment: part 2-43—particular requirements for the safety of x-ray equipment for interventional procedures. Report 60601-2-43. Geneva, Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission, 2000. Google Scholar
  • 31 Thierry-Chef I , Simon S , Miller DL . Radiation dose and cancer risk among pediatric patients undergoing interventional neuroradiology procedures. Pediatr Radiol 2006;36(suppl 2):159–162. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Thierry-Chef I , Simon SL , Land CE , Miller DL . Radiation dose to the brain and subsequent risk of developing brain tumors in pediatric patients undergoing interventional neuroradiology procedures. Radiat Res 2008;170:553–565. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lindskoug BA . The Reference Man in diagnostic radiology dosimetry. Br J Radiol 1992;65:431–437. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Chapple CL , Broadhead DA , Faulkner K . A phantom based method for deriving typical patient doses from measurements of dose-area product on populations of patients. Br J Radiol 1995;68:1083–1086. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 35 International Commission on Radiological Protection . Report of the Task Group on Reference Man. ICRP publication 23. Oxford, England: Pergamon, 1975. Google Scholar
  • 36 Efron B , Tibshirani R . Bootstrap methods for standard errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accuracy. Stat Sci 1986;1:54–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 37 National Radiation Protection Board . Patient dose reduction in diagnostic radiology: report by the Royal College of Radiologists and the National Radiological Protection Board. London, England: National Radiation Protection Board, 1990. Google Scholar
  • 38 Wall BF . Diagnostic reference levels: the way forward. Br J Radiol 2001;74:785–788. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Vañó E , Gonzalez L . Approaches to establishing reference levels in interventional radiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2001;94:109–112. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Radiation protection in medicine . ICRP publication 105. Ann ICRP 2007;37:1–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Vano E , Gonzalez L , Fernandez JM , Prieto C , Guibelalde E . Influence of patient thickness and operation modes on occupational and patient radiation doses in interventional cardiology. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2006;118:325–330. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Bleeser F , Hoornaert MT , Smans K , et al.. Diagnostic reference levels in angiography and interventional radiology: a Belgian multi-centre study. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:50–55. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Martin CJ , Farquhar B , Stockdale E , MacDonald S . A study of the relationship between patient dose and size in paediatric radiology. Br J Radiol 1994;67:864–871. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ruiz Cruces R , García-Granados J , Diaz Romero FJ , Hernández Armas J . Estimation of effective dose in some digital angiographic and interventional procedures. Br J Radiol 1998;71:42–47. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Brambilla M , Marano G , Dominietto M , Cotroneo AR , Carriero A . Patient radiation doses and references levels in interventional radiology. Radiol Med 2004;107:408–418. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Hart D , Hillier MC , Wall BF . Doses to patients from medical x-ray examinations in the UK: 2000 review. Publication NRPB-W14. Chilton, England: National Radiological Protection Board, 2002; http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733780154. Accessed May 18, 2009. Google Scholar
  • 47 Bor D , Sancak T , Toklu T , Olgar T , Ener S . Effects of radiologists’ skill and experience on patient doses in interventional examinations. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:32–35. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Vehmas T . Radiation exposure during standard and complex interventional procedures. Br J Radiol 1997;70:296–298. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Mavrikou I , Kottou S , Tsapaki V , Neofotistou V . High patient doses in interventional cardiology due to physicians’ negligence: how can they be prevented? Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008;129:67–70. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Tsapaki V , Kottou S , Kollaros N , et al.. Comparison of a conventional and a flat-panel digital system in interventional cardiology procedures. Br J Radiol 2004;77:562–567. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Storm ES , Miller DL , Hoover LJ , Georgia JD , Bivens T . Radiation doses from venous access procedures. Radiology 2006;238:1044–1050. LinkGoogle Scholar

Article History

Received March 17, 2009; revision requested May 11; final revision received May 18; accepted June 15; final version accepted June 22.
Published in print: Dec 2009