Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Operator exposure to x-ray in left and right radial access during percutaneous coronary procedures: OPERA randomised study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Operator exposure to x-ray in left and right radial access during percutaneous coronary procedures: OPERA randomised study
Do you wish to request the book?
Operator exposure to x-ray in left and right radial access during percutaneous coronary procedures: OPERA randomised study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Operator exposure to x-ray in left and right radial access during percutaneous coronary procedures: OPERA randomised study
2013
Overview
Objective Left radial access (LRA) and right radial access (RRA) have been shown to be safe and effective for coronary arteries catheterisation. However, the differences between the two approaches in terms of radiation exposure are still unclear. The aim of the present investigation is to evaluate in a randomised study, the dose of radiation absorbed by operators using either LRA or RRA. Design Randomised, prospective, double arm, single centre study. Setting University Hospital. Patients Male or female subjects with stable, unstable angina and silent ischaemia. Interventions The present study is a comparison of LRA and RRA for coronary artery catheterisation in terms of operators’ radiation exposure. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was the radiation dose absorbed by operators; secondary outcome measures were fluoroscopy time, dose-area product and contrast delivered. Results A total of 413 patients were enrolled; 209 were randomly selected to undergo diagnostic procedures with RRA and 204 with LRA. The operator's radiation exposure was significantly lower in the left radial group (LRA 33±37 μSv vs RRA 44±32 μSv, p=0.04). No significant differences were observed in fluoroscopy time (LRA 349±231s vs RRA 370±246 s p=0.09) and dose-area product (LRA 7011.42±3617.30 μGym2 vs RRA 7382.38±5226.61 μGym2, p=0.80), even though in both there was a trend towards a lower level in the LRA. No differences were observed in contrast medium delivered (LRA 89.92±32.55 ml vs RRA 88.88±35.35 ml, p=0.45). Conclusions The LRA was associated in the present report with a lower radiation dose absorbed by the operator during coronary angiography.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Cardiovascular Society,BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subject
/ Angina, Stable - diagnostic imaging
/ Angina, Unstable - diagnostic imaging
/ Cardiac Catheterization - instrumentation
/ Coronary Angiography - instrumentation
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Italy
/ Male
/ Myocardial Ischemia - diagnostic imaging
/ Myocardial Ischemia - therapy
/ Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - instrumentation
/ Radial Artery - diagnostic imaging
/ Studies
