Reducing hand radiation during renal access for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparison of radiation reduction techniques

• DOI: 10.1007/s00240-023-01510-x
• Publication Date: 2024-01-13T11:02:16Z
• Authors: Ricky Chen; Eun Hye Joo; Catalina Baas; John Hartman; Akin S. Amasyali; Kanha Shete; Joshua D. Belle; Cayde Ritchie; Elizabeth A. Baldwin; Zhamshid Okhunov; Ala’a Farkouh; D. Duane Baldwin
• Keywords: Surgeons; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Research; Occupational Exposure; Fluoroscopy; Cadaver; Humans; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous; Hand; Radiation Dosage

AbstractPercutaneous nephrolithotomy confers the highest radiation to the urologist’s hands compared to other urologic procedures. This study compares radiation exposure to the surgeon’s hand and patient’s body when utilizing three different techniques for needle insertion during renal access. Simulated percutaneous renal access was performed using a cadaveric patient and separate cadaveric forearm representing the surgeon’s hand. Three different needle-holding techniques were compared: conventional glove (control), a radiation-attenuating glove, and a novel needle holder. Five 300-s fluoroscopy trials were performed per treatment arm. The primary outcome was radiation dose (mSv) to the surgeon’s hand. The secondary outcome was radiation dose to the patient. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s B post-hoc tests were performed with p < 0.05 considered significant. Compared to the control (3.92 mSv), both the radiation-attenuating glove (2.48 mSv) and the needle holder (1.37 mSv) reduced hand radiation exposure (p < 0.001). The needle holder reduced hand radiation compared to the radiation-attenuating glove (p < 0.001). The radiation-attenuating glove resulted in greater radiation produced by the C-arm compared to the needle holder (83.49 vs 69.22 mGy; p = 0.019). Patient radiation exposure was significantly higher with the radiation-attenuating glove compared to the needle holder (8.43 vs 7.03 mSv; p = 0.027). Though radiation-attenuating gloves decreased hand radiation dose by 37%, this came at the price of a 3% increase in patient exposure. In contrast, the needle holder reduced exposure to both the surgeon’s hand by 65% and the patient by 14%. Thus, a well-designed low-density needle holder could optimize radiation safety for both surgeon and patient.