Abstract
Background
Although peripherally-inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion is commonly performed under fluoroscopic guidance, few reports have addressed performance and dosimetry when PICC is inserted under C-arm fluoroscopy.
Purpose
To evaluate the risk factors of radiation dose in performing PICC insertion using flat panel detector-based mobile C-arm fluoroscopy and a conventional angiography machine.
Material and Methods
Ninety-eight patients underwent the PICC procedure using conventional angiography equipment (n=49) or flat panel detector-based mobile C-arm fluoroscopy (n=49). Data were prospectively analyzed from July to November 2012. Dose-area product (DAP), tube voltage, tube current, fluoroscopy time, and image quality measured on a 5-point scale were estimated and compared using appropriate statistical tests.
Results
There were no significant differences in tube voltage, fluoroscopy time, and image quality between conventional angiography and mobile C-arm fluoroscopy. DAP, mean arm tube current, and tube current in chest fluoroscopy were significantly lower in mobile C-arm fluoroscopy than using the conventional angiography machine (P <0.05). Multivariate analysis identified tube current in chest fluoroscopy, arm tube current, and fluoroscopy equipment as significant risk factors for elevated radiation dose in PICC insertion.
Conclusion
PICC insertion can be performed using flat panel detector-based mobile C-arm fluoroscopy instead of a conventional angiography machine. Image quality and fluoroscopy time were not different between the two systems and the use of C-arm fluoroscopy significantly reduced radiation dose.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.