Mayo Clinic Study on How to Minimize Radiation Risks of Angioplasty Shows Highest Doses in Men, Large Body Mass, Complex Cases
Body size, gender and the complexity of heart disease significantly influence how much cumulative radiation skin dose that patients receive during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) therapy, also known as angioplasty, according to a new Mayo Clinic study. The study was undertaken as a quality control initiative to reduce the potential radiation risks of cancer to patients and PCI operators.
Presented today at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology, the review of 14 months’ worth of radiation data from 1,827 adult patients is an important early step in understanding ways to improve PCI safety and quality while optimizing therapeutic benefits. The Mayo Clinic study identified 20 clinical traits and circumstances that help predict whether a patient likely received higher or lower doses of radiation.
Identifying optimal means of using radiation in PCI is important because a chief advantage of PCI is its minimally-invasive nature in successfully opening vessels and placing stents, which makes it an increasingly popular option for treating select cases of heart disease. PCI’s minimally-invasive advantages include reducing patient trauma, speeding recovery and lowering costs, compared to traditional heart surgeries.
However, PCI owes its precision, safety and effectiveness to the X-ray fluoroscopy imaging used. X-ray fluoroscopy produces many images to make a movie that allows physicians to visualize the intricate vessel anatomy being treated and, therefore, holds the potential for increased radiation risk.
The amount of radiation dose used during PCI procedures is generally much greater than that used for a typical X-ray image such as a chest X-ray. But because a chest X-ray is usually a screening test and a PCI is a lifesaving procedure, from the clinical perspective, the risk of not performing the PCI is much greater than the predicted radiation risk associated with the procedure.
Mayo study results show:
Implications for Cure
“Radiation risk is a recognized hazard of our specialty that has not been systematically or aggressively addressed,” explains Chet Rihal, M.D., lead cardiovascular physician on the study. “But our commitment to patient safety and quality at Mayo Clinic, and to protecting operators who perform the therapy, makes this a priority issue for us. The next step for us is to follow up from this initial identification of the problem and lead efforts to formulate specific practice changes clinicians can use to improve safety while maintaining quality.”
Data also showed that radiation doses that comparable patients received differed depending on which of the 13 physicians treated them. Dr. Rihal says investigating possible causes of this finding is among the goals of the next phase of study.
Nationwide, concern is growing across medical fields about reducing risks of radiation from all sources, such as X-rays and computed tomography (CT) scans, because radiation is a risk factor for developing certain cancers. Recently the U.S. Food and Drug Association (FDA) has been addressing accidental cases of overexposure to radiation in certain specialties. The Mayo Clinic study cases differ from the FDA efforts. Mayo’s cases do not involve accidents or overexposure, but commonly accepted clinical best practices. “This work is a natural expression of Mayo’s historic commitment to improving patient safety, care and quality of treatment,” Dr. Rihal says. “We aren’t correcting errors, just improving the way things are done for all concerned.”
Mayo’s is the largest study to identify clinical conditions that correlate with radiation dose level, and is therefore an important first step leading to designing ways to reduce radiation levels through quality improvement training. Another of the Mayo study’s authors, Kenneth Fetterly, Ph.D., explains, “There is no standard model of the clinical determinants of radiation skin dose in PCI, so by using clinical data from a large sample of Mayo Clinic adult patients and commonly accepted statistical methods, we identified correlations between clinical variables and radiation dose that we hope will be useful in improving care.”
Collaboration and Support
In addition to Drs. Rihal and Fetterly, other Mayo Clinic physicians and scientists who worked on the study were Ryan Lennon; Malcom Bell, M.D.; and David Holmes Jr., M.D. Their work was supported by the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
About Mayo Clinic
For more than 100 years, millions of people from all walks of life have found answers at Mayo Clinic. These patients tell us they leave Mayo Clinic with peace of mind knowing they received care from the world's leading experts. Mayo Clinic is the first and largest integrated, not-for-profit group practice in the world. At Mayo Clinic, a team of specialists is assembled to take the time to listen, understand and care for patients' health issues and concerns. These teams draw from more than 3,700 physicians and scientists and 50,100 allied staff that work at Mayo Clinic’s campuses in Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona; and community-based providers in more than 70 locations in southern Minnesota., western Wisconsin and northeast Iowa. These locations treat more than half a million people each year. To best serve patients, Mayo Clinic works with many insurance companies, does not require a physician referral in most cases and is an in-network provider for millions of people. To obtain the latest news releases from Mayo Clinic, go to www.mayoclinic.org/news. For information about research and education visit www.mayo.edu. MayoClinic.com (www.mayoclinic.com) is available as a resource for your general health information.
VIDEO ALERT: Additional audio and video resources, including excerpts from an interview with Dr. Rihal describing the research, are available here. These materials also are subject to embargo but may be accessed in advance by journalists for incorporation into stories. The password for this post is ACC2010RIHAL.