Premium
Reducing Radiation Exposure During CRT Implant Procedures: Single‐Center Experience With Low‐Dose Fluoroscopy Settings and a Sensor‐Based Navigation System (MediGuide)
Author(s) -
THIBAULT BERNARD,
MONDÉSERT BLANDINE,
MACLE LAURENT,
DUBUC MARC,
DYRDA KATIA,
TALAJIC MARIO,
ROY DENIS,
RIVARD LÉNA,
GUERRA PETER G.,
ANDRADE JASON G.,
KHAIRY PAUL
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.193
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1540-8167
pISSN - 1045-3873
DOI - 10.1111/jce.13048
Subject(s) - fluoroscopy , medicine , implant , radiation exposure , nuclear medicine , cardiac resynchronization therapy , single center , radiology , surgery , heart failure , ejection fraction
Sensor‐Based Navigation and CRT Implantation Introduction Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implant procedures are often complex and prolonged, resulting in substantial ionizing radiation (IR) exposure to the patient and operator. We assessed the impact of lower‐dose fluoroscopy settings and a sensor‐based electromagnetic tracking system (MediGuide™, MDG) on reducing IR exposure during CRT implantation. Methods A single‐center 2‐group cohort study was conducted on 348 consecutive patients, age 66.4 ± 11.0 years, 80.4% male, with CRT implant procedures from 2013 to 2015. Patients were arbitrarily assigned to MDG (N = 239) versus no MDG (N = 109) guidance. Lower‐dose fluoroscopy settings were adopted in January 2015 (3 instead of 6 fps; 23 instead of 40 nGy/pulse; N = 101). Results Overall, MDG was associated with an 82.1% reduction in IR exposure (393 μGray·m 2 vs. 2191 μGray·m 2 , P < 0.001). Lower‐dose fluoroscopy resulted in a 59.5% reduction in IR‐exposure without MDG (1055 μGray·m 2 vs. 2608 μGray·m 2 , P < 0.001) and 81.8% reduction with MDG (108 μGray·m 2 vs. 595 μGray·m 2 , P < 0.001). Low‐dose fluoroscopy combined with MDG was associated with a 95.9% lower exposure to IR when compared to standard fluoroscopy without MDG (108 μGray·m 2 vs. 2608 μGray·m 2 , P < 0.001). Procedures with MDG were shorter (96 minutes vs. 123 minutes, P < 0.001) and associated with a trend towards a higher success rate (94.6% vs. 89.0%, P = 0.062), with fewer coronary sinus cannulation failures (2.1% vs. 6.4%, P = 0.040). Conclusion Low‐dose fluoroscopy settings are highly effective (>50%) in reducing IR exposure during CRT implant procedures. When combined with MDG, >95% reduction in IR exposure is achieved. Moreover, MDG shortens procedural duration and may improve acute procedural outcomes.