Advertisement

Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 40, Issue 7, pp 2606–2612 | Cite as

Percutaneous cryoablation of renal masses under CT fluoroscopy: radiation doses to the patient and interventionalist

  • Jessica K. StewartEmail author
  • Christopher B. Looney
  • Colin D. Anderson-Evans
  • Greta I. Toncheva
  • David R. Sopko
  • Charles Y. Kim
  • Terry T. Yoshizumi
  • Rendon C. Nelson
Article

Abstract

Purpose

Computed tomographic (CT) fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous cryoablation is an effective therapeutic method used to treat focal renal masses. The purpose of this study is to quantify the radiation dose to the patient and interventional radiologist during percutaneous cryoablation of renal masses using CT fluoroscopic guidance.

Methods

Over a 1-year period, the CT fluoroscopy time during percutaneous cryoablation of renal masses was recorded in 41 patients. The level of complexity of each procedure was designated as simple, intermediate, or complex. Patient organ radiation doses were estimated using an anthropomorphic model. Dose to the interventional radiologist was estimated using ion chamber survey meters.

Results

The average CT fluoroscopy time for technically simple cases was 47 s, 126 s for intermediate cases, and 264 s for complex cases. The relative risk of hematologic stomach and liver malignancy in patients undergoing this procedure was 1.003–1.074. The lifetime attributable risk of cancer ranged from 2 to 58, with the highest risk in younger patients for developing leukemia. The estimated radiation dose to the interventionalist without lead shielding was 390 mR (3.9 mGy) per year of cases.

Conclusions

The radiation risk to the patient during CT fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous renal mass cryoablation is, as expected, related to procedure complexity. Quantification of patient organ radiation dose was estimated using an anthropomorphic model. This information, along with the associated relative risk of malignancy, may assist in evaluating risks of the procedure, particularly in younger patients. The radiation dose to the interventionist is low regardless of procedure complexity, but highlights the importance of lead shielding.

Keywords

CT fluoroscopy Radiation dose Cryoablation 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Daly B, Krebs TL, Wong-You-Cheong JJ, Wang SS (1999) Percutaneous abdominal and pelvic interventional procedures using CT fluoroscopy guidance. Am J Roentgenol 173(3):637–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen BC, Remer EM (2010) Percutaneous cryoablation of renal tumors: patient selection, technique, and postprocedural imaging. Radiographics 30(4):887–900CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Georgiades CS, Hong K, Bizzel C, Geschwind JF, Rodriguez R (2008) Safety and efficacy of CT-guided percutaneous cryoablation for renal cell carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19(9):1302–1310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mazaris EM, Varkarakis IM, Solomon SB (2008) Percutaneous renal cryoablation: current status. Future Oncol 4(2):257–269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Silverman SG, Tuncali K, Adams DF, et al. (1999) CT fluoroscopy-guided abdominal interventions: techniques, results, and radiation exposure. Radiology 212(3):673–681CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paulson E, Sheafor DH, Enterline DS, McAdams HP, Yoshizumi TT (2001) CT fluoroscopy–guided interventional procedures: techniques and radiation dose to radiologists. Radiology 220(1):161–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    National Research Council (U.S.) (2006) Committee to assess health risks from exposure to low level of ionizing radiation. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2, vol. xvi. Washington D.C.: National Academies Press, p 406Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leng S, Christner JA, Carlson SK, et al. (2011) Radiation dose levels for interventional CT procedures. Am J Roentgenol 197(1):W97–W103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Park BK, Morrison PR, Tatli S, et al. (2012) Estimated effective dose of CT-guided percutaneous cryoablation of liver tumors. Eur J Radiol 81(8):1702–1706PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arellano RS, Gervais DA, Mueller PR (2011) CT-guided drainage of abdominal abscesses: hydrodissection to create access routes for percutaneous drainage. Am J Roentgenol 196(1):189–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Adult male phantom model 702-D handling instructions (package insert) (2002) Norfolk, VA: CIRS, p 200XGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Radiological Protection in Biomedical Research (1991) A report of Committee 3 adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 22(3):1–28 (v–xxiv)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hurwitz LM, Reiman RE, Yoshizumi TT, et al. (2007) Radiation dose from contemporary cardiothoracic multidetector CT protocols with an anthropomorphic female phantom: implications for cancer induction. Radiology 245(3):742–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Little MP, Boice JD (1999) Comparison of breast cancer incidence in the Massachusetts tuberculosis fluoroscopy cohort and in the Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Radiat Res 151(2):218–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Balter S (2001) Interventional fluoroscopy: physics, technology, and safety. New York: Wiley, p 308Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huda W, Slone RM (1995) Review of radiologic physics, vol. xv. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, p 286Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wolbarst AB (2005) Physics of radiology, vol. xv, 2nd edn. Madison: Medical Physics Pub, p 647Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ (2012) Radiobiology for the radiologist, 7th edn. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & WilkinsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Curry TS, et al. (1990) Christensen’s physics of diagnostic radiology, vol. xi, 4th edn. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, p 522Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ho P, et al. (2007) Ionizing radiation absorption of vascular surgeons during endovascular procedures. J Vasc Surg 46(3):455–459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica K. Stewart
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christopher B. Looney
    • 1
  • Colin D. Anderson-Evans
    • 1
  • Greta I. Toncheva
    • 1
  • David R. Sopko
    • 1
  • Charles Y. Kim
    • 1
  • Terry T. Yoshizumi
    • 1
  • Rendon C. Nelson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyDuke University HospitalDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations