Abstract
Background & Objective:Due to increase in number of cardiac catheterization procedures safety concerns is an issue nowadays. Multiple diagnostic modalities use radiations, which also put a patient at higher cumulative radiation exposure. Therefore steps should be taken to minimize radiation exposure during cardiac catheterization. Hence determination of factors which prolong FT will result in better understanding of problem. This retrospective study was undertaken to determine factors responsible for prolong fluoroscopy time in patients undergoing coronary artery catheterization.Methods:This retrospective study was conducted at catheterization Laboratory National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Karachi from June 2014 to June 2015. Patients of either gender, aged between 18 to 90 years undergoing cardiac catheterization procedures were included. Radiation exposure time was measured in terms of fluoroscopy time.Results:A total of 957 patients were included in this study out of which 731 were of diagnostic Coronary Angiograms (CA) and 226 were of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). The mean age of the study participants was 54.12±10.89 years and majority 734(76.6%) were male. Mean fluoroscopy time (FT) in the patients subjected to PCI was 9.61±6.07 minutes while in cases for CA 4.17±4.13 minutes. FT for CA was observed significantly dependent on procedural access, operator’s experience, and LV angiogram. While FT for PCI was found dependent on number of stents deployed during the procedure.Conclusion:For invasive coronary angiographic procedures radial route increased fluoroscopy time. For percutaneous coronary intervention femoral and radial route fluoroscopy time were not significantly different.
Highlights
Increase in number of procedures is due to advancement in both operator expertise and improvement in hardware, fewer complications are associated with cardiac catheterization procedures
Results of this study may emphasize on reducing the fluoroscopy time to avoid excessive radiation exposure. This descriptive cross sectional study was conducted at catheterization Laboratory National institute of cardiovascular diseases, Karachi from June 2014 to June 2015. It was approved by hospital ethical review committee and informed consent was taken from all patients included
Mean age of 731 coronary angiography patients was 53.97 ± 10.75 years, majority, 75.2% (550), were male, and access for the procedure was femoral for majority, 91.8% (671), of the patients
Summary
In modern era cardiac catheterization has established its role as a diagnostic and interventional modality in cardiovascular disease.[1,2,3] Increase in number of procedures is due to advancement in both operator expertise and improvement in hardware, fewer complications are associated with cardiac catheterization procedures.Due to increased number of cardiac catheterization procedures, concerns regarding radiation safety have arisen.[4,5,6] Increased radiation exposure hasPak J Med Sci January - February 2019 Vol 35 No 1 www.pjms.org.pk 166 been associated with periprocedural complications including early mortality, emergent CABG, and contrast-induced nephropathy.[7]Fluoroscopic time (FT) is most assessed tool for radiation exposure. Due to increased number of cardiac catheterization procedures, concerns regarding radiation safety have arisen.[4,5,6] Increased radiation exposure has. Due to increase in number of cardiac catheterization procedures safety concerns is an issue nowadays. Determination of factors which prolong FT will result in better understanding of problem.This retrospective study was undertaken to determine factors responsible for prolong fluoroscopy time in patients undergoing coronary artery catheterization. Patients of either gender, aged between 18 to 90 years undergoing cardiac catheterization procedures were included. Results: A total of 957 patients were included in this study out of which 731 were of diagnostic Coronary Angiograms (CA) and 226 were of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). For percutaneous coronary intervention femoral and radial route fluoroscopy time were not significantly different
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
