Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2017; 05(03): E172-E178
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-102934
Original article
Eigentümer und Copyright ©Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017

A simple ergonomic measure reduces fluoroscopy time during ERCP: A multivariate analysis

Fahd Jowhari
1   Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Kingston General Hospital, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
,
Wilma M. Hopman
2   Clinical Research Centre, Kingston General Hospital, and Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
,
Lawrence Hookey
1   Gastrointestinal Diseases Research Unit, Kingston General Hospital, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 20 January 2016

accepted after revision 30 December 2016

Publication Date:
13 March 2017 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatgraphy (ERCP) carries a radiation risk to patients undergoing the procedure and the team performing it. Fluoroscopy time (FT) has been shown to have a linear relationship with radiation exposure during ERCP. Recent modifications to our ERCP suite design were felt to impact fluoroscopy time and ergonomics. This multivariate analysis was therefore undertaken to investigate these effects, and to identify and validate various clinical, procedural and ergonomic factors influencing the total fluoroscopy time during ERCP. This would better assist clinicians with predicting prolonged fluoroscopic durations and to undertake relevant precautions accordingly.

Patients and methods A retrospective analysis of 299 ERCPs performed by 4 endoscopists over an 18-month period, at a single tertiary care center was conducted. All inpatients/outpatients (121 males, 178 females) undergoing ERCP for any clinical indication from January 2012 to June 2013 in the chosen ERCP suite were included in the study. Various predetermined clinical, procedural and ergonomic factors were obtained via chart review. Univariate analyses identified factors to be included in the multivariate regression model with FT as the dependent variable.

Results Bringing the endoscopy and fluoroscopy screens next to each other was associated with a significantly lesser FT than when the screens were separated further (–1.4 min, P = 0.026). Other significant factors associated with a prolonged FT included having a prior ERCP (+ 1.4 min, P = 0.031), and more difficult procedures (+ 4.2 min for each level of difficulty, P < 0.001). ERCPs performed by high-volume endoscopists used lesser FT vs. low-volume endoscopists (–1.82, P = 0.015).

Conclusions Our study has identified and validated various factors that affect the total fluoroscopy time during ERCP. This is the first study to show that decreasing the distance between the endoscopy and fluoroscopy screens in the ERCP suite significantly reduces the total fluoroscopy time, and therefore radiation exposure to patients and staff involved in the procedure.

 

  • References

  • 1 Larkin C, Workman A, Wright R. et al. Radiation doses to patients during ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 161-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Naidu LS, Singhal S, Preece DE. et al. Radiation exposure to personnel performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Postgrad Med J 2005; 81: 660-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 de Revision E, Uradomo L, Cohen H. et al. World Gastroenterology Organization Practice Guideline: Radiation protection in the endoscopy suite-Minimizing radiation exposure for patients and staff in endoscopy: a joint ASGE/IAEA/WGO guideline [Official Spanish translation of the WGO]. Gastroenterologia Latinoamerican 2012; 36: 202
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rehani M, Vano E, Ciraj-Bjelac O. et al. Radiation and cataract. Radiat Protection Dosimetry 2011; 147: 300-304
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kleinerman RA. Cancer risks following diagnostic and therapeutic radiation exposure in children. Pediatr Radiol 2006; 36 (Suppl. 02) 121-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Campbell N, Sparrow K, Fortier M. et al. Practical radiation safety and protection for the endoscopist during ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55: 552-557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Romagnuolo J, Cotton PB. Recording ERCP fluoroscopy metrics using a multinational quality network: establishing benchmarks and examining time-related improvements. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 1224-1230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ho IK, Cash BD, Cohen H. et al. Radiation exposure in gastroenterology: improving patient and staff protection. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109: 1180-1194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Shergill AK, McQuaid KR, Rempe lD. Ergonomics and GI endoscopy. Gastrointest. Endosc 2009; 70: 145-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Pedrosa MC, Farraye FA, Shergill AK. et al. Minimizing occupational hazards in endoscopy: personal protective equipment, radiation safety, and ergonomics. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 227-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Buls N, Pages J, Mana F. et al. Patient and staff exposure during ERCP. Br J Radiol 2002; 75: 435-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Johlin FC, Pelsang RE, Greenleaf M. Phantom study to determine radiation exposure to medical personnel involved in ERCP fluoroscopy and its reduction through equipment and behavior modifications. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 893-897
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chen MY, Van swearingen FL, Mitchell R. et al. Radiation exposure during ERCP: effect of a protective shield. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 43: 1-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cohen RV, Aldred MA, Paes WS. et al. How safe is ERCP to the endoscopist?. Surg Endosc 1997; 11: 615-617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hernandez RJ, Goodsitt MM. Reduction of radiation dose in pediatric patients using pulsed fluoroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167: 1247-1253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Scanavacca M, D'avila A, Velarde JL. et al. Reduction of radiation exposure time during catheter ablation with the use of pulsed fluoroscopy. Int J Cardiol 1998; 63: 71-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Uradomo LT, Goldberg EM, Darwin PE. Time-limited fluoroscopy to reduce radiation exposure during ERCP: a prospective randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 66: 84-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jorgensen J, Rubenstein J, Goodsitt M. et al. Radiation doses to ERCP patients are significantly lower with experienced endoscopists. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 72: 58-65
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Uradomo LT, Lustberg ME, Darwin PE. Effect of physician training on fluoroscopy time during ERCP. Dig Dis Sci 2006; 51: 909-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kim E, Mcloughlin M, Lam EC. et al. Prospective analysis of fluoroscopy duration during ERCP: critical determinants. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 50-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Katsinelos P, Gatopoulou A, Gkagkalis S. et al. A prospective analysis of factors influencing fluoroscopy time during therapeutic ERCP. Ann Gastroenterol 2012; 25: 338-344
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cotton PB, Eisen G, Romagnuolo J. et al. Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: results of an ASGE working party. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 868-874
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Adler DG, Lieb II JG, Cohen J. et al. Quality indicators for ERCP. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 91-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar