Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB) · 2026
Patient exposure in paediatric Interventional Cardiology: a multicenter inter-comparison of clinical practices in Italy.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Monte Francesca, Giannone Angelo, Bettinelli Andrea, Annoni Giuseppe, Butera Gianfranco, Cannatà Vittorio, Cheli Martino, Ciucci Davide, Donti Andrea, Favetta Marco, Formigari Roberto, Fraccaro Chiara, Gaio Gianpiero, Giordano Mario, Levrero Fabrizio, Meliota Giovanni, Montefoschi Danilo, Palmacci Federico, Rossetti Veronica, Russo Maria Giovanna, Santoro Giuseppe, Zorz Alessandra, Salvo Giovanni Di, Castaldi Biagio, Paiusco Marta
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This multicenter study aims to assess compliance with Image Gently Alliance dose optimization principles in paediatric Interventional Cardiology (IC) and to examine inter-center variability in patient radiation exposure.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Leading centers in Italy were involved. An operational survey,developed in agreement with the Image Gently recommendations, was administered to investigate clinical practices and identify any deviations from established guidelines.Data from 2841 procedures were collected. Dosimetric data (PKA, Ka,r, fluoroscopy time) from centers were compared and analyzed alongside the questionnaire responses.Inter-center differences were assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: Despite adherence to recommendations,the questionnaire identified deviations correlated with exposure,including failure to remove the anti-scatter grid for patients < 20 kg, excessive magnification,and extensive cine-acquisition. Statistically significant inter-center differences in dose were observed. Centre A shows a significant reduction in patient dose for almost all procedure types. As an example, for angioplasty, centre A showed a lower median value (PKA = 3.5 Gy·cm2), less than half that of C (PKA = 9.2 Gy·cm2), D (PKA = 10.3 Gy·cm2) and E (PKA = 10.0 Gy·cm2). Centre E exhibited higher doses for most procedures: a median PKA = 5.6 Gy·cm2 in diagnostic catheterizations compared to a range of 1.6-4.6 Gy·cm2 in the other centres, and a median PKA = 3.2 Gy·cm2 for Patent Ductus Arteriosus closure compared to 0.7-1.4 Gy·cm2. These results can be attributed to an outdated equipment.
CONCLUSIONS: Investigating clinical practices in a multicenter context is crucial for harmonizing operations and ensuring dose monitoring. Identifying differences in practices, equipment, and image quality that affect patient dose is essential for enhancing patient safety.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Leading centers in Italy were involved. An operational survey,developed in agreement with the Image Gently recommendations, was administered to investigate clinical practices and identify any deviations from established guidelines.Data from 2841 procedures were collected. Dosimetric data (PKA, Ka,r, fluoroscopy time) from centers were compared and analyzed alongside the questionnaire responses.Inter-center differences were assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: Despite adherence to recommendations,the questionnaire identified deviations correlated with exposure,including failure to remove the anti-scatter grid for patients < 20 kg, excessive magnification,and extensive cine-acquisition. Statistically significant inter-center differences in dose were observed. Centre A shows a significant reduction in patient dose for almost all procedure types. As an example, for angioplasty, centre A showed a lower median value (PKA = 3.5 Gy·cm2), less than half that of C (PKA = 9.2 Gy·cm2), D (PKA = 10.3 Gy·cm2) and E (PKA = 10.0 Gy·cm2). Centre E exhibited higher doses for most procedures: a median PKA = 5.6 Gy·cm2 in diagnostic catheterizations compared to a range of 1.6-4.6 Gy·cm2 in the other centres, and a median PKA = 3.2 Gy·cm2 for Patent Ductus Arteriosus closure compared to 0.7-1.4 Gy·cm2. These results can be attributed to an outdated equipment.
CONCLUSIONS: Investigating clinical practices in a multicenter context is crucial for harmonizing operations and ensuring dose monitoring. Identifying differences in practices, equipment, and image quality that affect patient dose is essential for enhancing patient safety.