Skip Navigation



European Heart Journal Advance Access published online on December 15, 2006

European Heart Journal, doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehl420
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/2/183    most recent
ehl420v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dragusin, O.
Right arrow Articles by Heidbüchel, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dragusin, O.
Right arrow Articles by Heidbüchel, H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The European Society of Cardiology 2006. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Evaluation of a radiation protection cabin for invasive electrophysiological procedures

Octavian Dragusin1,{dagger}, Rukshen Weerasooriya2,{dagger}, Pierre Jaïs2, Mélèze Hocini2, Joris Ector1, Yoshihide Takahashi2, Michel Haïssaguerre2, Hilde Bosmans1 and Hein Heidbüchel1,*

1 Cardiology–Electrophysiology, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
2 Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, University of Bordeaux-Pessac, France

Received 3 July 2006; revised 8 October 2006; accepted 16 November 2006.

* Corresponding author. Tel: +32 16 34 42 48; fax: +32 16 34 42 40. E-mail address: hein.heidbuchel{at}uz.kuleuven.ac.be

Aims Complex invasive electrophysiological procedures may result in high cumulative operator radiation exposure. Classical protection with lead aprons results in discomfort while radioprotection is still incomplete. This study evaluated the usefulness of a radiation protection cabin (RPC) that completely surrounds the operator.

Methods and results The evaluation was performed independently in two electrophysiology laboratories (E1—Leuven, Belgium; E2—Bordeaux, France), comparing operator radiation exposure using the RPC vs. a 0.5 mm lead-equivalent apron (total of 135 procedures). E1 used thermoluminiscent dosimeters (TLDs) placed at 16 positions in and out of the RPC and nine positions in and out of the apron. E2 used more sensitive electronic personal dosimeters (EPD), placed at waist and neck. The sensitivity thresholds of the TLDs and EPDs were 10–20 µSv and 1–1.5 µSv, respectively. All procedures could be performed unimpeded with the RPC. Median TLD dose values outside protected areas were in the range of 57–452 µSv, whereas doses under the apron or inside the RPC were all at the background radiation level, irrespective of procedure and fluoroscopy duration and of radiation energy delivered. In addition, the RPC was protecting the entire body (except the hands), whereas lead apron protection is incomplete. Also with the more sensitive EPDs, the radiation dose within the RPC was at the sensitivity threshold/background level (1.3±0.6 µSv). Again, radiation to the head was significantly lower within the RPC (1.9±1.2 µSv) than with the apron (102±23 µSv, P<0.001).

Conclusion The use of the RPC allows performing catheter ablation procedures without compromising catheter manipulation, and with negligible radiation exposure for the operator.

Key Words: Radiofrequency catheter ablation • Radioprotection • Interventional cardiology


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EuropaceHome page
E. M. Aliot, W. G. Stevenson, J. M. Almendral-Garrote, F. Bogun, C. H. Calkins, E. Delacretaz, P. D. Bella, G. Hindricks, P. Jais, M. E. Josephson, et al.
EHRA/HRS Expert Consensus on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias: Developed in a partnership with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), a Registered Branch of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA)
Europace, June 1, 2009; 11(6): 771 - 817.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
S. Knecht, M. Hocini, M. Wright, N. Lellouche, M. D. O'Neill, S. Matsuo, I. Nault, V. S. Chauhan, K. J. Makati, M. Bevilacqua, et al.
Left atrial linear lesions are required for successful treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation
Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2008; 29(19): 2359 - 2366.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
P. Kirchhof, A. Auricchio, J. Bax, H. Crijns, J. Camm, H.-C. Diener, A. Goette, G. Hindricks, S. Hohnloser, L. Kappenberger, et al.
Outcome parameters for trials in atrial fibrillation: executive summary: Recommendations from a consensus conference organized by the German Atrial Fibrillation Competence NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)
Eur. Heart J., November 2, 2007; 28(22): 2803 - 2817.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EuropaceHome page
P. Kirchhof, A. Auricchio, J. Bax, H. Crijns, J. Camm, H.-C. Diener, A. Goette, G. Hindricks, S. Hohnloser, L. Kappenberger, et al.
Outcome parameters for trials in atrial fibrillation: Recommendations from a consensus conference organized by the German Atrial Fibrillation Competence NETwork and the European Heart Rhythm Association
Europace, November 1, 2007; 9(11): 1006 - 1023.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.