• Tom J Gieroba, Nicole Williams, Georgia Antoniou, and Peter J Cundy.
• Discipline of Orthopaedics and Trauma, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
• ANZ J Surg. 2017 Apr 1; 87 (4): 282-286.

BackgroundMini C-arm image intensifiers (IIs) are promoted to permit lower radiation dose than traditional IIs with a lower purchase price and without the need for a radiographer, saving time. In real-world usage, radiation dose is not always lower.MethodsA retrospective review of prospectively collected data for 620 children undergoing forearm fracture reduction in theatre was undertaken. Imaging was performed with the Fluoroscan mini C-arm or a comparison traditional II. Radiation dose and theatre time were recorded.ResultsThere was no significant difference in radiation dose as measured by dose-area product (0.013 versus 0.014 Gy.cm2 , P = 0.22). We noted an inverse association between operator experience and radiation dose. The mini C-arm allowed a shorter procedure time (26 versus 30 min, P < 0.001) and theatre time (13 versus 16 min, P < 0.001). Re-displacement rates were similar (1.3 versus 2.2%). The Fluoroscan is AU$120 000 cheaper to purchase and AU$35 283 cheaper to run per year than the comparison II. Consultants had a 14% lower dose-area product (0.012 versus 0.014 Gy.cm2 , P < 0.001) and 18% shorter screening time (8 versus 9.8 s, P < 0.001) than registrars.ConclusionThe Fluoroscan mini C-arm II does not demonstrate a radiation saving during closed reductions of paediatric forearm fractures but allows shorter procedures and theatre time with similar re-displacement rates. The purchase price is lower than a traditional II. We noted that operator experience reduces radiation dose.© 2016 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

31 keywords...

hide…