Abstract 4142243: Efficacy of Radiation Protective Shields on Operator Radiation Exposure During Cardiac Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: The cumulative exposure to X-ray radiation during cardiac intervention can indeed pose various health risks. This meta-analysis aims to compare radiation protective shields (drapes and X-ray shields) versus conventional safety measures (lead apron) on the operator’s procedural radiation exposure during cardiac interventions. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from PubMed, Embase Cochrane, Scopus, and WOS until February 2024. We used the random-effects model to report continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: We included 16 RCTs with 3370 patients. Radiation shields were significantly associated with low total operator radiation dose (MD: -7.3, 95%CI [-11.9, -2.7], P< 0.01) with no significant difference between both arms regarding chest radiation dose (MD: -20.7, 95%CI [-48.9, 7.6], P= 0.15) and thyroid radiation dose (MD: -15.4, 95%CI [-32.4, 1.7], P= 0.08). Also, shields were significantly associated with low air kerma (MD: -46.4, 95%CI [-87.3, -5.5], P= 0.03) and low fluoroscopy duration (MD: -0.3, 95%CI [-0.6, -0.04], P= 0.02). However, there was no difference between both arms regarding the total procedure time (MD: -0.7, 95%CI [-3.1, 1.6], P= 0.54), contrast volume (MD: -3.2, 95%CI [-10.2, 3.7], P= 0.36), and dose area product (MD: 628.4, 95% CI [-3466.9, 4723.8], P= 0.76). Also, we found no differences between drape and shields subgroups in all outcomes. Conclusion: Radiation protection shields significantly reduced the total radiation dose exposure and air kerma. Also, shields are associated with lower fluoroscopy duration, insignificant lower procedure time, and contrast volume.