Background

The reference point cumulative air kerma (Ka,r) is a commonly used dose quantity for establishing substantial radiation dose levels (SRDLs) that can provide guidance for patient dose management actions following fluoroscopically-guided procedures. However, the Ka,r may not correlate well with the patient peak skin dose (Dskin,max) because the relationship between Ka,r and Dskin,max may vary widely due to clinical variations. Therefore, it may be prudent for institutions to establish different Ka,r-based SRDL values based on the clinical procedure type.

Purpose

The present study investigates the relationship between Ka,r and Dskin,max for different clinical services and how that variation may overestimate or underestimate the need for patient follow-up. Additionally, the study suggests a possible framework for establishing Ka,r SRDLs based on the clinical data analysis.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed for fluoroscopically guided interventions exceeding 5 Gy Ka,r. For each procedure, the patient Dskin,max was estimated and the ratio of Dskin,max to Ka,r (DKR) was calculated. Results were pooled into one of three clinical service categories: body interventions (n = 33), cardiac interventions (n = 81), or neurological (neuro) interventions (n = 44). The distributions in Ka,r, Dskin,max, and DKR were analyzed in aggregate and by the clinical service category.

Results

The median Ka,r values for procedures exceeding 5 Gy were 6.0 Gy (95% CI [5.6, 6.4]) for body interventions, 5.8 Gy (95% CI [5.5, 6.0]) for cardiac interventions, and 6.3 Gy (95% CI [5.9, 6.6]) for neuro interventions. Dskin,max for the same procedure data sets were 5.0 Gy (95% CI [4.4, 5.6]) for body interventions, 5.5 Gy (95% CI [5.2, 5.8]) for cardiac interventions, and 3.7 Gy (95% CI [3.4, 4.0]) for neuro interventions. This resulted in median DKR values of 0.81 for body interventions, 0.91 for cardiac interventions, and 0.59 for neuro interventions.

Conclusions

This study illustrates the need to understand the relationship between the reported Ka,r and the patient Dskin,max for different types of interventional procedures. This is especially important when an institution uses Ka,r as the parameter for establishing an SRDL threshold to identify patients who may require clinical follow-up. The implications of this research and a guide for how to implement these findings are elaborated on in the Discussion.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved