METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards were followed when conducting the systematic review. We searched Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Highwire, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang database in May 2023 to identify studies involving Intraoperative fluoroscopy versus no fluoroscopy during posterior or posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty. Finally, we identified 1133 patients (1145 hips) assessed in seven studies.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in terms of acetabular cup inclination angle (ACIA, P = 0.43), ACIA within safe zone rate (P = 0.58), acetabular cup anteversion angle (ACAA, P = 0.46); ACAA within safe zone rate (P = 0.72), Combined safe zone rate (P = 0.28), dislocation rate (P = 0.64) and infection rate (P = 0.94) between two groups. Compared with the no fluoroscopy group, the intraoperative fluoroscopy group had more operation time (P
METHODS: We scrutinized the routine radiological exposure parameters during 58 clinical neuro-interventional procedures such as, exposure direction, magnification, frame rate, and distance between image receptor to patient's body and evaluate their effects on patient's dose using an anthropomorphic phantom. Radiation dose received by the occipital region, ears and eyes of the phantom were measured using MOSkin detectors.
RESULTS: DSA imaging technique is a major contributor to patient's dose (80.9%) even though they are used sparingly (5.3% of total frame number). The occipital region of the brain received high dose largely from the frontal tube constantly placed under couch (73.7% of the total KAP). When rotating the frontal tube away from under the couch, the radiation dose to the occipital reduced by 40%. The use of magnification modes could increase radiation dose by 94%. Changing the image receptor to the phantom surface distance from 10 to 40cm doubled the radiation dose received by the patient's skin at the occipital region.
CONCLUSION: Our findings provided important insights into the contribution of selected fluoroscopic exposure parameters and their impact on patient's dose during neuro-interventional radiology procedures. This study showed that the DSA imaging technique contributed to the highest patient's dose and judicial use of exposure parameters might assist interventional radiologists in effective skin and eye lens dose reduction for patients undergoing neuro-interventional procedures.
METHODS: All relevant studies were identified through keyword searches in electronic databases from inception until September 2020. The searched publications were reviewed, categorised and analysed based on their respective methodology.
RESULTS: Hundred and one publications were identified which utilised existing MC-based applications/programs or customised MC simulations. Two outstanding challenges were identified that contribute to uncertainties in the virtual simulation reconstruction. The first challenge involves the use of anatomical models to represent individuals. Currently, phantom libraries best balance the needs of clinical practicality with those of specificity. However, mismatches of anatomical variations including body size and organ shape can create significant discrepancies in dose estimations. The second challenge is that the exact positioning of the patient relative to the beam is generally unknown. Most dose prediction models assume the patient is located centrally on the examination couch, which can lead to significant errors.
CONCLUSION: The continuing rise of computing power suggests a near future where MC methods become practical for routine clinical dosimetry. Dynamic, deformable phantoms help to improve patient specificity, but at present are only limited to adjustment of gross body volume. Dynamic internal organ displacement or reshaping is likely the next logical frontier. Image-based alignment is probably the most promising solution to enable this, but it must be automated to be clinically practical.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy, safety, and diagnostic outcome of fluoroscopic guided and CT transpedicular biopsy techniques.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial.
PATIENT SAMPLE: Sixty consecutive patients with clinical symptoms and radiological features suggestive of spinal infection or malignancy were recruited and randomized into fluoroscopic or CT guided spinal biopsy groups. Both groups were similar in terms of patient demographics, distribution of spinal infections and malignancy cases, and the level of biopsies.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy of both methods, determined based on true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative biopsy findings. Secondary outcome measures included radiation exposure to patients and doctors, complications, and postbiopsy pain score.
METHODS: A transpedicular approach was performed with an 8G core biopsy needle. Specimens were sent for histopathological and microbiological examinations. Diagnosis was made based on biopsy results, clinical criteria and monitoring of disease progression during a 6-month follow up duration. Clinical criteria included presence of risk factors, level of inflammatory markers and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Radiation exposure to patients and doctors was measured with dosimeters.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the diagnostic accuracy of fluoroscopic and CT guided spinal biopsy (p=0.67) or between the diagnostic accuracy of spinal infection and spinal tumor in both groups (p=0.402 for fluoroscopy group and p=0.223 for CT group). Radiation exposure to patients was approximately 26 times higher in the CT group. Radiation exposure to doctors in the CT group was approximately 2 times higher compared to the fluoroscopic group if a lead shield was not used. Lead shields significantly reduced radiation exposure to doctors anywhere from 2 to 8 times. No complications were observed for either group and the differences in postbiopsy pain scores were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy, procedure time, complication rate and pain score for both groups were similar. However, radiation exposure to patients and doctors were significantly higher in the CT group without lead protection. With lead protection, radiation to doctors reduced significantly.
METHODS: Radiation dose received at left outer canthus (LOC) and left eyelid (LE) were measured using Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistor dosimeters on 35 patients who underwent diagnostic or cerebral embolization procedures.
RESULTS: The radiation dose received at the LOC region was significantly higher than the dose received by the LE. The maximum eye lens dose of 1492 mGy was measured at LOC region for an AVM case, followed by 907 mGy for an aneurysm case and 665 mGy for a diagnostic angiography procedure. Strong correlations (shown as R(2)) were observed between kerma-area-product and measured eye doses (LOC: 0.78, LE: 0.68). Lateral and frontal air-kerma showed strong correlations with measured dose at LOC (AKL: 0.93, AKF: 0.78) and a weak correlation with measured dose at LE. A moderate correlation was observed between fluoroscopic time and dose measured at LE and LOC regions.
CONCLUSIONS: The MOSkin dose-monitoring system represents a new tool enabling real-time monitoring of eye lens dose during neuro-interventional procedures. This system can provide interventionalists with information needed to adjust the clinical procedure to control the patient's dose.
KEY POINTS: Real-time patient dose monitoring helps interventionalists to monitor doses. Strong correlation was observed between kerma-area-product and measured eye doses. Radiation dose at left outer canthus was higher than at left eyelid.