Only a few studies have systematically evaluated fluoroscopy data of electrophysiological and device implantation procedures. Aims of this study were to quantify ionizing radiation exposure for electrophysiological/device implantation procedures in a large series of patients and to analyze the x-ray exposure trend over years and radiation exposure in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation considering different technical aspects.
We performed a retrospective analysis of all electrophysiological/device implantation procedures performed during the past 7 years in a modern, large-volume laboratory. We reported complete fluoroscopy data on 8150 electrophysiological/device implantation procedures (6095 electrophysiological and 2055 device implantation procedures); for each type of procedure, effective dose and lifetime attributable risk of cancer incidence and mortality were calculated. Over the 7-year period, we observed a significant trend reduction in fluoroscopy time, dose area product, and effective dose for all electrophysiological procedures (P<0.001) and a not statistically significant trend reduction for device implantation procedures. Analyzing 2416 atrial fibrillation ablations, we observed a significant variability of fluoroscopy time, dose area product and effective dose among 7 different experienced operators (P<0.0001) and a significant reduction of fluoroscopy use over time (P<0.0001) for all of them. Considering atrial fibrillation ablation techniques, fluoroscopy time was not different (P = 0.74) for radiofrequency catheter ablation in comparison with cryoablation, though cryoablation was still associated with higher dose area product and effective dose values (P<0.001).
Electrophysiological procedures involve a nonnegligible x-ray use, leading to an increased risk of malignancy. Awareness of radiation-related risk, together with technological advances, can successfully optimize fluoroscopy use.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 January 2022.
All research outputs
#11,485,932
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
#6,198
of 11,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,683
of 374,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
#171
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 65th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 374,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
