We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Efficacy of the RADPAD Protection Drape in Reducing Operators' Radiation Exposure in the Catheterization Laboratory: A Sham-Controlled Randomized Trial.
Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 2017 November
BACKGROUND: Interventional cardiologists are increasingly exposed to radiation-induced diseases like cataract and the stochastic risk of left-sided brain tumors. The RADPAD is a sterile, disposable, lead-free shield placed on the patient with the aim to minimize operator-received scatter radiation. The objective of the trial was to examine the RADPAD's efficacy in a real-world situation.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In the current, double-blind, sham-controlled, all-comer trial, patients undergoing diagnostic catheterization or percutaneous coronary interventions were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to a radiation absorbing shield (RADPAD), standard treatment (NOPAD), or a sham shield (SHAMPAD). The sham shield allowed testing for shield-induced radiation behavior. The primary outcome was the difference in relative exposure of the primary operator between the RADPAD and NOPAD arms and was defined as the ratio between operator's exposure (E in µSv) and patient exposure (dose area product in mGy·cm2 ), measured per procedure. A total of 766 consecutive coronary procedures were randomized to the use of RADPAD (N=255), NOPAD (N=255), or SHAMPAD (N=256). The use of RADPAD was associated with a 20% reduction in relative operator exposure compared with that of NOPAD ( P =0.01) and a 44% relative exposure reduction compared with the use of a SHAMPAD ( P <0.001). Use of the SHAMPAD was associated with a 43% higher relative radiation exposure than procedures with NOPAD ( P =0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: In clinical daily practice, the standard use of the RADPAD radiation shield reduced operator radiation exposure compared with procedures with NOPAD or SHAMPAD. This study supports the routine use of RADPAD in the catheterization laboratory.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03139968.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In the current, double-blind, sham-controlled, all-comer trial, patients undergoing diagnostic catheterization or percutaneous coronary interventions were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to a radiation absorbing shield (RADPAD), standard treatment (NOPAD), or a sham shield (SHAMPAD). The sham shield allowed testing for shield-induced radiation behavior. The primary outcome was the difference in relative exposure of the primary operator between the RADPAD and NOPAD arms and was defined as the ratio between operator's exposure (E in µSv) and patient exposure (dose area product in mGy·cm2 ), measured per procedure. A total of 766 consecutive coronary procedures were randomized to the use of RADPAD (N=255), NOPAD (N=255), or SHAMPAD (N=256). The use of RADPAD was associated with a 20% reduction in relative operator exposure compared with that of NOPAD ( P =0.01) and a 44% relative exposure reduction compared with the use of a SHAMPAD ( P <0.001). Use of the SHAMPAD was associated with a 43% higher relative radiation exposure than procedures with NOPAD ( P =0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: In clinical daily practice, the standard use of the RADPAD radiation shield reduced operator radiation exposure compared with procedures with NOPAD or SHAMPAD. This study supports the routine use of RADPAD in the catheterization laboratory.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03139968.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app