0
Research Papers

Effect of C-Arm Year Model on Radiation Scatter

[+] Author and Article Information
Omar Bakr

2550, 23rd Street,
Building 9, 2nd Floor,
San Francisco, CA 94110
e-mail: omar.bakr@ucsf.edu

Saam Morshed

2550, 23rd Street,
Building 9, 2nd Floor,
San Francisco, CA 94110
e-mail: MorshedS@orthosurg.ucsf.edu

Meir Marmor

2550, 23rd Street,
Building 9, 2nd Floor,
San Francisco, CA 94110
e-mail: marmorm@orthosurg.ucsf.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received June 2, 2014; final manuscript received November 25, 2014; published online January 12, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Rafael V. Davalos.

J. Med. Devices 9(1), 011010 (Mar 01, 2015) (4 pages) Paper No: MED-14-1189; doi: 10.1115/1.4029419 History: Received June 02, 2014; Revised November 25, 2014; Online January 12, 2015

Since the 1980’s C-arm fluoroscopy has been an integral part of orthopaedic trauma surgery. The advancement in C-arm technology has resulted in different generations of C-arms co-existing in the operating rooms. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiation scatter patterns of different generation C-arms. Three generation of C-arms were tested: GE OEC 9800 Plus (1999/2000), Siemens Arcadis Orbic 3D (2004), Philips BV Pulsera 2.3 (2008). Radiation scatter was measured using six real-time dosimetry badges set up on either side of the surgical table (Mizuho OSI, flat-top). Distance of C-arm was normalized at 20 in. and 10 in. from Image Intensifier. Each device was set to the automatic brightness control (ABC) setting. A phantom limb was irradiated for 120 s and radiation scatter was summed for both AP and lateral positions. At their typical operating room settings there was a reduction in radiation scatter using the newer generation C-arms. Results for total radiation, normalized to Philips, are as follows: Philips 1 (100%), GE 2.4 (240%), and Siemens 1.4 (140%). Newer generation C-arms can be expected to generate lower radiation scatter. Special care should be taken to attempt a lower dose setting, especially when utilizing older generation C-arms to minimize radiation scatter to practitioner.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

In (a) and (b), there will be two other configurations not shown, this consists of dosimeters located 1 foot above and below the elevation of the phantom limb, as shown in (c) and (d). In (c) and (d), a view from the foot of the bed, there will be an additional two dosimeters, not shown, this will be located similar to what you see in (a) and (b). Each box represents a Philips PDM (Personal Dose Monitor), part of the Philips Dose Aware monitoring system. Each PDM will measure radiation scatter received at that location in μSv.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Displays a comparison of the summed radiation exposure (uSv) of the six badges during 120 s of fluoroscopy time for each configuration. (b) and (c) display average mA and kV for each C-arm configuration.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In