TY - JOUR
T1 - Not All Flat-Panel C-Arms Are Created Equal
T2 - A Comparison of Three Major Manufacturers
AU - Jensen, Stephanie
AU - Peverini, Daniel R.
AU - Amasyali, Akin S.
AU - Okhunov, Zhamshid
AU - Chen, Ricky
AU - Hartman, John C.
AU - Joo, Eun Hye
AU - Baas, Catalina
AU - Ritchie, Cayde
AU - Baldwin, Elizabeth A.
AU - Farkouh, Ala'a
AU - Baldwin, D. Duane
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
PY - 2024/3/1
Y1 - 2024/3/1
N2 - Introduction: Flat-panel detector C-arms (FCs) are reported to reduce radiation exposure and improve image quality compared with conventional image intensifier C-arms (CCs). The purpose of this study was to compare radiation exposure and image quality between three commonly used FCs. Materials and Methods: A cadaver model was placed in the prone position to simulate percutaneous nephrolithotomy. We compared the following three FCs: OEC Elite CFD from GE HealthCare, Zenition 70 from Philips, and Ziehm Vision RFD from Ziehm Imaging. To measure the radiation dose, optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) were utilized during five 300-second trials, conducted under three settings: automatic exposure control (AEC), AEC with low dose (LD), and LD with the lowest pulse rate (LDLP). Ten blinded urologists evaluated the image quality. Data were statistically analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s B post hoc tests. Results: In the AEC setting, the Philips C-arm demonstrated lower ventral OSLD exposure (42,446 mrad) compared with both the GE (51,076 mrad) and Ziehm (83,178 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. Similarly, in the LD setting, the Philips C-arm resulted in less ventral OSLD exposure (25,926 mrad) than both the Ziehm (30,956 mrad) and GE (38,209 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. Meanwhile, in the LDLP setting, the Ziehm C-arm showed less ventral OSLD exposure (4019 mrad) than both the GE (7418 mrad) and Philips (8229 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. All three manufacturers received adequate image quality ratings at the AEC and LD settings. However, at LDLP, the Ziehm C-arm received inadequate ratings in 8% of images, whereas both the GE and Philips C-arms received 100% adequate ratings (p = 0.016). Conclusions: Radiation produced by flat-panel C-arms varies dramatically, with the highest exposure (Ziehm) being almost double the lowest (Philips) in AEC. Improved picture quality at the lowest settings may come at the cost of increased radiation dose. Surgeons should carefully select the machine and settings to minimize radiation exposure while still preserving the image quality.
AB - Introduction: Flat-panel detector C-arms (FCs) are reported to reduce radiation exposure and improve image quality compared with conventional image intensifier C-arms (CCs). The purpose of this study was to compare radiation exposure and image quality between three commonly used FCs. Materials and Methods: A cadaver model was placed in the prone position to simulate percutaneous nephrolithotomy. We compared the following three FCs: OEC Elite CFD from GE HealthCare, Zenition 70 from Philips, and Ziehm Vision RFD from Ziehm Imaging. To measure the radiation dose, optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) were utilized during five 300-second trials, conducted under three settings: automatic exposure control (AEC), AEC with low dose (LD), and LD with the lowest pulse rate (LDLP). Ten blinded urologists evaluated the image quality. Data were statistically analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s B post hoc tests. Results: In the AEC setting, the Philips C-arm demonstrated lower ventral OSLD exposure (42,446 mrad) compared with both the GE (51,076 mrad) and Ziehm (83,178 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. Similarly, in the LD setting, the Philips C-arm resulted in less ventral OSLD exposure (25,926 mrad) than both the Ziehm (30,956 mrad) and GE (38,209 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. Meanwhile, in the LDLP setting, the Ziehm C-arm showed less ventral OSLD exposure (4019 mrad) than both the GE (7418 mrad) and Philips (8229 mrad; p < 0.001) C-arms. All three manufacturers received adequate image quality ratings at the AEC and LD settings. However, at LDLP, the Ziehm C-arm received inadequate ratings in 8% of images, whereas both the GE and Philips C-arms received 100% adequate ratings (p = 0.016). Conclusions: Radiation produced by flat-panel C-arms varies dramatically, with the highest exposure (Ziehm) being almost double the lowest (Philips) in AEC. Improved picture quality at the lowest settings may come at the cost of increased radiation dose. Surgeons should carefully select the machine and settings to minimize radiation exposure while still preserving the image quality.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85187108386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85187108386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/end.2023.0537
DO - 10.1089/end.2023.0537
M3 - Article
C2 - 38185836
AN - SCOPUS:85187108386
SN - 0892-7790
VL - 38
SP - 228
EP - 233
JO - Journal of Endourology
JF - Journal of Endourology
IS - 3
ER -