Schueler, Beth A.

Background: Intraoperative computed tomography and image-guided navigation improve the accuracy of screw placement. Radiation exposure to the patient remains a primary drawback. The objective of the present study was to compare the total intraoperative radiation dose and assess the resultant image quality for O-arm-assisted pedicle screw insertion, among 3 protocols: default (manufacturer recommended), institutional (reduced dose utilized in our institution), and pediatric (new protocol with lowest dose). Methods: Thirty-seven consecutive patients under the age of 18 years underwent posterior instrumentation of the spine and underwent an intraoperative O-arm scan. Techniques (kV and mAs) for default and institutional dose settings were manually adjusted based on spinal level and body weight. Pediatric dose techniques were 80 kV/80 mAs with no adjustment for level or weight. The number of scans repeated because of inadequate imaging was assessed, and the mean estimated effective dose between the 3 protocols was compared. Results: Sixty-eight scans were performed in 37 consecutive patients with mean age of 14 years and mean weight of 55 kg. For reference, the effective radiation dose of a chest x-ray is approximately 0.10 mSv. Use of the default protocol resulted in higher mean effective dose per scan of 4.65 mSv, whereas institutional protocol resulted in 2.37 mSv. The pediatric protocol reduced the mean dose to 0.65 mSv. The total effective dose per surgery was: 1.17 mSv (pediatric), 3.83 mSv (institutional), and 12.79 mSv (default) (P<0.0001 each). All scans lead to satisfactory image quality except in 1 patient >100 kg with stainless steel implants. There were no neurological or other implant-related complications. The pediatric protocol resulted in satisfactory image quality with the lowest total radiation dose, only 1/10 of that of the default protocol. Conclusions: We successfully switched to a pediatric low-dose O-arm protocol in clinical practice, reducing the dose to <1/4 of the mean annual natural background radiation. This may allow use of intraoperative computed tomography and navigation for pedicle screw placement without excessive radiation exposure to young patients. Level of Evidence: Level III—retrospective comparative study.

Background: Intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopy and low-dose O-arm are both reasonable means to assist in screw placement for idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Both using pediatric low-dose O-arm settings and minimizing the number of radiographs during C-arm fluoroscopy guidance decrease patient radiation exposure and its deleterious biological effect that may be associated with cancer risk. We hypothesized that the radiation dose for C-arm-guided fluoroscopy is no less than low-dose O-arm scanning for placement of pedicle screws. Methods: A multicenter matched-control cohort study of 28 patients in total was conducted. Fourteen patients who underwent O-arm-guided pedicle screw insertion for spinal fusion surgery in 1 institution were matched to another 14 patients who underwent C-arm fluoroscopy guidance in the other institution in terms of the age of surgery, body weight, and number of imaged spine levels. The total effective dose was compared. A low-dose pediatric protocol was used for all O-arm scans with an effective dose of 0.65 mSv per scan. The effective dose of C-arm fluoroscopy was determined using anthropomorphic phantoms that represented the thoracic and lumbar spine in anteroposterior and lateral views, respectively. The clinical outcome and complications of all patients were documented. Results: The mean total effective dose for the O-arm group was approximately 4 times higher than that of the C-arm group (P<0.0001). The effective dose for the C-arm patients had high variability based on fluoroscopy time and did not correlate with the number of imaged spine levels or body weight. The effective dose of 1 low-dose pediatric O-arm scan approximated 85 seconds of the C-arm fluoroscopy time. All patients had satisfactory clinical outcomes without major complications that required returning to the operating room. Conclusions: Radiation exposure required for O-arm scans can be higher than that required for C-arm fluoroscopy, but it depends on fluoroscopy time. Inclusion of more medical centers and surgeons will better account for the variability of C-arm dose due to distinct patient characteristics, surgeon’s preference, and individual institution’s protocol. Level of Evidence: Level III–case-control study.

Purpose: To determine the factors that affect mean absorbed dose and fluoroscopic times during renal artery stent placement. Materials and Methods: After institutional review board approval, the HI-IQ database was queried for patients undergoing renal artery stent placement only from January 2007 to June 2010. Procedures that were performed as part of other procedures such as iliac artery stents were excluded. The HI-IQ data included fluoroscopy time ( f) and radiation dose (mGy). Demographic, medical history, procedural details, and advanced preprocedural renal artery stent imaging were obtained. Variables (number of stents, average body mass index , number of stents placed per year and number of years’ service of an interventional physician, pre-procedural imaging, and use of embolic protection device) were analyzed using a t test after log transformation and testing for variance with an F test. Results: A total of 134 patients (75 males, 70.6 ± 10.5 years old) underwent the placement of 177 renal artery stents (unilateral [n = 95], average stent per patient = 1.3). Mean fluoroscopy time was 15.6 minutes and mean absorbed dose to the patient was 1729 mGy. The average fluoroscopic time and absorbed dose was significantly higher with bilateral stent placement compared to unilateral placement (13.8 vs 19.7 minutes, P = .002; 1803 vs 2380 mGy, P = .03). The average fluoroscopic time was significantly higher in patients undergoing abdominal aortogram prior to renal artery selection and stent placement. Conclusion: The placement of more than 1 stent with an abdominal angiogram prior to renal artery stent placement results in increased fluoroscopic time and mean absorbed dose.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Mammographic breast density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer (BC). We established the Mayo Mammography Health Study (MMHS) cohort study at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota (MN) to examine the association of breast density with BC. We evaluated the influence of the image acquisition technique on the density and BC association. METHODS: From October 2003 to September 2006, all women scheduled for screening mammography at the Mayo Clinic were invited to participate. Eligible women were residents of MN, Iowa (IA) or Wisconsin (WI); age 35+; and had no personal history of BC. A risk factor questionnaire, consent form and permission to link to tumor registries were obtained. Incident BC was identified through 2009 by linkage to the Mayo and state cancer registries. A case-cohort of all incident BCs and 2300 randomly selected women (the subcohort) were used to examine the association of breast density and BC using digitized film mammograms at the time of enrollment while controlling for the influence of the acquisition parameters (peak kilovoltage, milliampere-second, and compressed breast thickness). Two density measures were considered: a quantitative percent density (PD) measure estimated using the computer-assisted thresholding program, Cumulus (University of Toronto), and the 4-category clinical BI-RADS measure. Proportional hazards regression was used to calculate hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for BC associated with quartiles of PD (0-6.2%,6.3-14.9%, 15.0-25.7% and 25.8%+) and BI-RADS categories 1-4 (almost entirely fatty to extremely dense). All models included age, postmenopausal hormone use (PMH), BMI, and menopausal status. The influence of acquisition parameters was evaluated by examining models with and without their inclusion. RESULTS: A total of 20,982 (50%) women participated in MMHS; 1058 (5%) with a prior history of BC were excluded, for a total cohort of 19,924. Compared to nonresponders, responders were younger (57.5 vs. 58.4 yrs), more likely to have ever used PMH (45% vs. 33%), and more likely to have a BC family history (19% vs 16%). The case-cohort consisted of 317 incident cases and 2300 women in the subcohort. Women were excluded from the current analysis if PD could not be estimated or if acquisition parameters were not available, leaving 249 cases and 1937 in the subcohort. As expected, PD was associated with BC [HR (95% CI): 1.0 (REF), 2.1 (1.4-3.1), 3.0 (2.0-4.5), and 4.6 (3.0-7.0) for quartiles; p-trend&lt;0.001]. Controlling for acquisition parameters attenuated the association [HR (95% CI): 1.0 (REF), 2.3 (1.5-3.4), 2.4 (1.6-3.7), and 3.0 (1.8-5.0) for quartiles; p-trend&lt;0.001]. Results for BI-RADS density were similar to those for PD. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that breast density is a significant risk factor for BC and demonstrates that the acquisition technique confounds the density and BC risk association. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 3716. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-3716