‘No longer acceptable’: Cardiologists push for immediate improvements in cath lab radiation safety
Cath labs and other interventional suites in the United States should act immediately to ensure they protect clinicians from preventable radiation exposure and orthopedic injuries, according to a new consensus statement from six leading medical societies.
The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), American Society of Echocardiography (ASE), Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), and Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) all worked together to craft the new statement. It was published in full in JSCAI, JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions and the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology.[1, 2, 3]
“For decades, we accepted occupational radiation exposure and the physical burden of heavy protective equipment as unavoidable realities of working in a fluoroscopy laboratory,” David G. Rizik, MD, an interventional cardiology with Banner University Medical Center and chair of the statement’s writing group, said in a statement. “That is no longer acceptable. Technologies available today can greatly reduce radiation exposure while also addressing the orthopedic injuries associated with traditional lead protection. The question is no longer whether these solutions exist. It is whether we are willing to make protecting healthcare workers the priority it deserves. This consensus makes clear that the time for implementation is now.”
An issue years in the making
Cath lab safety has been a significant concern among interventional cardiologists, sonographers and other clinicians for a number of years now. Procedures performed in these labs are associated with significant radiation exposure, for example, and the heavy aprons can lead to long-lasting orthopedic injuries.
SCAI and the other societies behind this consensus statement have been asking for improvements for quite some time. Not only is improved safety good for the well-being of these clinicians—it is also seen as a necessary step if the field of interventional cardiology is ever going to start appealing more to medical students and other trainees.
Then authors of this statement pushed for a more widespread implementation of enhanced radiation protection devices, pointing to research that they can reduce radiation exposure by up to 99%. They also called for cath labs to be built with safety in mind from the very beginning so that operators are no longer required to rely so much on heavy lead aprons.
Another key takeaway from this statement is the fact that federal and state radiation safety standards need to be updated due to major advances in cath lab technologies.
“Our goal is to ensure the best outcomes for patients as well as for the healthcare team that is operating within the fluoroscopy lab,” SCAI President J. Dawn Abbott, MD, director of interventional cardiology and the cardiac cath labs at Brown University Health Cardiovascular Institute, said in the same statement. “Today’s enhanced radiation protection systems give us a clear opportunity to align policy, technology, and clinical practice around a safer standard. From healthcare systems to manufacturers, state legislatures and regulators, we all have a role in making sure these protections become part of the infrastructure used to deliver interventional care. This will ensure continued growth and access for these essential procedures.”
Click here, here or here to read the full consensus statement.
Some of these same societies collaborated on a separate report about cath lab safety in March. Click here for more details.
Michael has more than 19 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.