Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exposure of medical staff to radiation during osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fracture: descriptive analysis and comparison of different devices

  • Trauma Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The use of fluoroscopy is necessary during proximal femoral fracture (PFF) osteosynthesis. The frequency of these procedures justifies a description of radiation exposure and comparisons between different techniques and between the different surgical team members.

Methods

This observational prospective and comparative study includes a series of 68 patients with PFF receiving osteosynthesis. Radiation exposure was assessed for all members of the operating team. The radiation dose measurements for the different members of the surgical team during PFF osteosynthesis were compared. The factors affecting the radiation dose were investigated.

Results

The mean active dosimeter readings for each operation were 7.39 µSv for the primary surgeon, 3.93 µSv for the assistant surgeon, 1.92 µSv for the instrument nurse, 1.25 µSv for the circulating nurse, and 0.64 µSv for the anaesthesiologist, respectively. Doses decreased significantly between these different members of the medical team (all p < 0.001). The dose also varied with patient age and BMI, as well as with fluoroscopy time and operating time, but not with type of fracture or type of osteosynthesis.

Conclusion

Medical staff receives significantly different doses depending on their position in relation to the radiation source. Operating time and fluoroscopy time are the modifiable factors that affect the radiation dose. The radiation doses received by the different members of the medical teams involved in proximal femur osteosynthesis procedures all fall below the doses recommended by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Müller LP, Suffner J, Wenda K et al (1998) Radiation exposure to the hands and the thyroid of the surgeon during intramedullary nailing. Injury 29:461–468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Seagger R, Howell J, David H, Gregg-Smith S (2004) Prevention of secondary osteoporotic fractures–why are we ignoring the evidence? Injury 35:986–988

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Benetos IS, Babis GC, Zoubos AB et al (2007) Factors affecting the risk of hip fractures. Injury 38:735–744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kannus P, Parkkari J, Sievänen H et al (1996) Epidemiology of hip fractures. Bone 18:57S–63S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. International Commission on Radiological Protection (2010) Radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures outside the imaging department. ICRP Publication 117. Ann ICRP 40

  6. Alonso JA, Shaw DL, Maxwell A et al (2001) Scattered radiation during fixation of hip fractures. Is distance alone enough protection? J Bone Jt Surg Br 83:815–818

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Plourde G, Pancholy SB, Nolan J et al (2015) Radiation exposure in relation to the arterial access site used for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 386:2192–2203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sciahbasi A, Rigattieri S, Sarandrea A et al (2015) Operator radiation exposure during right or left transradial coronary angiography: a phantom study. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med 16:386–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J et al (2007) Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2007: orthopaedic Trauma Association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma 21:S1–S133

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sulieman A, Alzimami K, Habeeballa B et al (2014) Evaluation of occupational and patient radiation doses in orthopedic surgery. Appl Radiat Isot, Med

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ramisetty NM, Pynsent PB, Abudu A (2005) Fracture of the femoral neck, the risk of serious underlying pathology. Injury 36:622–626

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cooper C, Campion G, Melton LJ (1992) Hip fractures in the elderly: a world-wide projection. Osteoporos Int 2:285–289

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kesavachandran CN, Haamann F, Nienhaus A (2012) Radiation exposure of eyes, thyroid gland and hands in orthopaedic staff: a systematic review. Eur J Med Res 17:28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnell O, Kanis JA (2004) An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 15:897–902

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Palácio EP, Ribeiro AA, Gavassi BM et al (2014) Exposure of the surgical team to ionizing radiation during orthopedic surgical procedures. Rev Bras Ortop 49:227–232

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Elffors L (1998) Are osteoporotic fractures due to osteoporosis? Impacts of a frailty pandemic in an aging world. Aging Milan Italy 10:191–204

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Harrison JD, Balonov M, Martin CJ et al (2016) Use of effective dose. Ann ICRP 45:215–224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jablon S, Bailar JC (1980) The contribution of ionizing radiation to cancer mortality in the United States. Prev Med 9:219–226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Khan IA, Kamalasekaran S, Fazal MA (2012) Risk of ionising radiation to trainee orthopaedic surgeons. Acta Orthop Belg 78:106–110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mastrangelo G, Fedeli U, Fadda E et al (2005) Increased cancer risk among surgeons in an orthopaedic hospital. Occup Med Oxf Engl 55:498–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Moore C, Heeckt P (2011) Reducing radiation risk in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Bone Jt Sci 2:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  22. Abas AA, Rahman RA, Yahya N et al (2014) Occupational radiation exposure to anesthetists from fluoroscopic projections during orthopedic operative procedures. Clin Ter 165:e253–e257

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dalgleish S, Hince A, Finlayson DF (2015) Peri-operative radiation exposure: are overweight patients at increased risks? Injury 46:2448–2451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Blattert TR, Fill UA, Kunz E et al (2004) Skill dependence of radiation exposure for the orthopaedic surgeon during interlocking nailing of long-bone shaft fractures: a clinical study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124:659–664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mehlman CT, DiPasquale TG (1997) Radiation exposure to the orthopaedic surgical team during fluoroscopy: “how far away is far enough?”. J Orthop Trauma 11:392–398

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fuchs M, Schmid A, Eiteljörge T et al (1998) Exposure of the surgeon to radiation during surgery. Int Orthop 22:153–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Tasbas BA, Yagmurlu MF, Bayrakci K et al (2003) Which one is at risk in intraoperative fluoroscopy? Assistant surgeon or orthopaedic surgeon? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 123:242–244. doi:10.1007/s00402-003-0516-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Baumgartner R, Libuit K, Ren D et al (2016) Reduction of radiation exposure from C-arm fluoroscopy during orthopaedic trauma operations with introduction of real-time dosimetry. J Orthop Trauma 30:e53–e58. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000000442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Richter P, Dehner C, Scheiderer B et al (2013) Emission of radiation in the orthopaedic operation room: a comprehensive review. OA Musculoskeletal Medicine 1:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Burns S, Thornton R, Dauer LT et al (2013) Leaded eyeglasses substantially reduce radiation exposure of the surgeon’s eyes during acquisition of typical fluoroscopic views of the hip and pelvis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 95:1307–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Roux A, Bronsard N, Blanchet N, de Peretti F (2011) Can fluoroscopy radiation exposure be measured in minimally invasive trauma surgery? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 97:662–667

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Botchu R, Ravikumar K (2008) Radiation exposure from fluoroscopy during fixation of hip fracture and fracture of ankle: effect of surgical experience. Indian J Orthop 42:471–473

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Riley SA (1989) Radiation exposure from fluoroscopy during orthopedic surgical procedures. Clin Orthop 248:257–260

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kuon E, Weitmann K, Hoffmann W et al (2015) Multicenter long-term validation of a minicourse in radiation-reducing techniques in the catheterization laboratory. Am J Cardiol 115:367–373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Richter PH, Steinbrener J, Schicho A, Gebhard F (2016) Does the choice of mobile C-arms lead to a reduction of the intraoperative radiation dose? Injury 47:1608–1612. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.04.031

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lee T, Shin SW, Choi D et al (1987) Risk factors of radiation dose in patients undergoing peripherally-inserted central catheter procedure using conventional angiography equipment and flat panel detector-based mobile C-arm fluoroscopy. Acta Radiol Stockh Swed 55:1234–1238. doi:10.1177/0284185113514221

    Google Scholar 

  37. Esfandiari H, Amiri S, Lichti DD, Anglin C (2016) A fast, accurate and closed-form method for pose recognition of an intramedullary nail using a tracked C-arm. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 11:621–633. doi:10.1007/s11548-015-1294-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Khoury A, Liebergall M, Weil Y, Mosheiff R (2007) Computerized fluoroscopic-based navigation-assisted intramedullary nailing. Am J Orthop Belle Mead NJ 36:582–585

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rouen University Hospital, 1 rue de Germont, 76031, Rouen cedex, France

    Cédric Siedlecki, Rémi Gauthé, Xavier Roussignol & Mourad Ould-Slimane

  2. Health informatics Department, Rouen University Hospital, 1 rue de Germont, 76031, Rouen cedex, France

    André Gillibert

  3. Department of Radioprotection, Rouen University Hospital, 1 rue de Germont, 76031, Rouen cedex, France

    Kevin Bellenger

Authors
  1. Cédric Siedlecki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rémi Gauthé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. André Gillibert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kevin Bellenger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xavier Roussignol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mourad Ould-Slimane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rémi Gauthé.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siedlecki, C., Gauthé, R., Gillibert, A. et al. Exposure of medical staff to radiation during osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fracture: descriptive analysis and comparison of different devices. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137, 1391–1397 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2761-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2761-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation