Skip to main content
Log in

Level of knowledge on radiation exposure and compliance to wearing protective equipment: where do endourologists stand? An ESUT/EULIS survey

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript



Fluoroscopy is valuable in modern endourology. We present the results of a survey where compliance to radiation safety measures was tested according to surgical exposure, and level of understanding of the radiation rules and risks associated with it.


A 52-item, anonymous questionnaire, structured by 6 ESUT/EULIS experts was distributed at 3 different endourological meetings during 2017–2018. Main aim was to evaluate level of knowledge on radiation physics and the protective measures taken against radiation exposure by participants. Fisher’s exact test, Kruskal–Wallis test and ROC curve were used for statistical analysis.


211 responses were evaluated. Number of correct answers (median 7.00) differed significantly according to age (p = 0.001), working position (p = 0.005), working field (p < 0.001), number of semirigid (p < 0.001)/flexible URS (p < 0.001) and PNL (p < 0.001) performed per year. Physicians aged 50–60 years, consultants, academics and those who performed more procedures achieved higher scores. In our study 51.7% of responders used shields in the operating room, 89.6% wore lead aprons, 84.4% thyroid shields, while glasses and gloves were used by 14.7% and 8.1%, respectively. Age, working field and number of correct answers did not affect significantly the use of protection in contrast with endourology fellowship training, working position and lessons on radiation. Interestingly, residents, untrained endourologists and those who were provided with lessons on radiation were more compliant.


Our study revealed that majority of modern urologists advocate radiation protection during endourology practice. Senior consultants and academic urologists performing a high volume of procedures seem to understand physics and rules of radiation use.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others



Percutaneous nephrolithotomy




Computed tomography




Intravenous pyelography


Shockwave lithotripsy


As low as reasonably achievable






EAU section of uro-technology


EAU section of urolithiasis


Receiver operating characteristic


Confidence interval


Years old


Body mass index


Retrograde intrarenal surgery


  1. Busch U (2011) 110 years ago: Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen received the first Nobel Prize. Z Med Phys 21(3):159–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bury RF (2002) Radiation hazards in urological practice. BJU Int 89(6):505–509

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hall EJ (1988) Radiobiology for the radiologist, 3rd edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  4. Perisinakis K, Damilakis J, Theocharopoulos N et al (2001) Accurate assessment of patient effective radiation dose and associated detriment risk from radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures. Circulation 104:58–62

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Theocharopoulos N, Damilakis J, Perisinakis K et al (2006) Occupational exposure in the electrophysiology laboratory: quantifying and minimizing radiation burden. Br J Radiol 79:644–651

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Goldstein JA, Balter S, Cowley M et al (2004) Occupational hazards of interventional cardiologists: prevalence of orthopedic health problems in contemporary practice. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 63(4):407–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. da Castane WR, Esperan GD (2007) How to protect yourself and others from radiation. In: Smith AD (ed) Smith’s textbook of endourology, 2nd edn. BC Decker Inc., Lewiston, pp 11–14

    Google Scholar 

  8. Felmlee JP, McGough PF, Morin RL et al (1991) Hand dose measurements in interventional radiology. Health Phys 60(2):265–267

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Shiralkar S, Rennie A, Snow M et al (2003) Doctors’ knowledge of radiation exposure: questionnaire study. BMJ 327(7411):371–372

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bagley DH, Cubler-Goodman A (1990) Radiation exposure during ureteroscopy. J Urol 144(6):1356–1358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Giblin JG, Rubenstein J, Taylor A et al (1996) Radiation risk to the urologist during endourologic procedures, and a new shield that reduces exposure. Urology 48(4):624–627

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Elkoushy MA, Andonian S (2011) Prevalence of orthopedic complaints among endourologists and their compliance with radiation safety measures. J Endourol 25(10):1609–1613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kocher KE, Meurer WJ, Fazel R et al (2011) National trends in use of computed tomography in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 58(5):452–462.e3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pauwels EK, Bourguignon M (2011) Cancer induction caused by radiation due to computed tomography: a critical note. Acta Radiol 52(7):767–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lawrence T, Rosenberg S (eds) (2008) Cancer: principles and practice of oncology. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reisz JA, Bansal N, Qian J et al (2014) Effects of ionizing radiation on biological molecules–mechanisms of damage and emerging methods of detection. Antioxid Redox Signal 21(2):260–292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mettler FA Jr, Huda W, Yoshizumi TT et al (2008) Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog. Radiology 248(1):254–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pfister SA, Deckart A, Laschke S et al (2003) Unenhanced helical computed tomography vs intravenous urography in patients with acute flank pain: accuracy and economic impact in a randomized prospective trial. Eur Radiol 13(11):2513–2520

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tamm EP, Silverman PM, Shuman WP (2003) Evaluation of the patient with flank pain and possible ureteral calculus. Radiology 228(2):319–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stabin M et al (1992) Radiation-dosimetry for technetium-99m-MAG3, technetium-99m-DTPA, and iodine-131-OIH based on human biodistribution studies. J Nucl Med 33(1):33–40

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Soye JA, Paterson A (2008) A survey of awareness of radiation dose among health professionals in Northern Ireland. Br J Radiol 81(969):725–729

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tse V, Lising J, Khadra M et al (1999) Radiation exposure during fluoroscopy: should we be protecting our thyroids? Aust N Z J Surg 69(12):847–848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Synowitz M, Kiwit J (2006) Surgeon’s radiation exposure during percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Neurosurg Spine 4(2):106–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Reagan JT, Slechta AM (2010) Factors related to radiation safety practices in California. Radiol Technol 81(6):538–547

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Devalia KL, Peter VK, Madanur MA et al (2006) Exposure of the thyroid to radiation during routine orthopaedic procedures. Acta Orthop Belg 72(5):615–620

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Söylemez H, Sancaktutar AA, Silay MS et al (2013) Knowledge and attitude of European urology residents about ionizing radiation. Urology 81(1):30–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Moore B, vanSonnenberg E, Casola G et al (1992) The relationship between back pain and lead apron use in radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158(1):191–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Boeri L, Gallioli A, De Lorenzis E et al (2018) Impact of surgical experience on radiation exposure during retrograde intrarenal surgery: a propensity-score matching analysis. Eur Urol Focus.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sfoungaristos S, Lorber A, Gofrit ON et al (2015) Surgical experience gained during an endourology fellowship program may affect fluoroscopy time during ureterorenoscopy. Urolithiasis 43:369–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Weld LR, Nwoye UO, Knight RB et al (2015) Fluoroscopy time during uncomplicated unilateral ureteroscopy for urolithiasis decreases with urology resident experience. World J Urol 33:119–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



LT: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. BS: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. TK: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. GK: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. KS: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. CS: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. EL: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing. SA: protocol/project development, data collection/management, data analysis, and manuscript writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lazaros Tzelves.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

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

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 219 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (PDF 118 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tzelves, L., Somani, B., Knoll, T. et al. Level of knowledge on radiation exposure and compliance to wearing protective equipment: where do endourologists stand? An ESUT/EULIS survey. World J Urol 38, 761–768 (2020).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: