Research Article| Volume 21, ISSUE 1, P2-6, March 2018

Download started.


Should We Keep the Lead in the Aprons?

Published:January 21, 2018DOI:
      Medical staff should not be exposed to the primary X-ray beam during fluoroscopy-guided interventional procedures (FGIP). The main source of staff exposure is scatter radiation from the patient, which can be significant. Although many aspects of X-ray exposure to the patient as well as occupational exposure to interventional radiologists and other staff are strongly regulated and monitored in most countries, it is surprising how loosely the labeling and testing of the protective aprons is regulated.
      Interventional radiologists (IRs) have to be experts in interventional radiology as well as in basic facts regarding ways to provide a satisfactory level of protection from occupational exposure. IRs, however, are not familiar with the apron testing methods. The accompanying documents provided with aprons by manufacturers may not be informative enough. Vendors often report apron effectiveness at a single beam quality and attenuation. The vendor reports repeatedly disagree with independent reports, which clearly show that the attenuation of these garments at other important unreported energies may be lower than expected. Better trust no one and check your protective garment yourself, or, better yet, consult a medical physicist when making purchasing decisions related to protective garments.
      Each interventionist should choose garments that are appropriately protective for that individual’s practice. Review of past personal dosimetry results and consultation with a medical physicist can help the IR make the best decision.
      This article will help the reader to understand why all protective garments are not created equally, and provides some practical tools that will allow safe and healthy practice in FGIP.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Techniques in Vascular & Interventional Radiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


      1. Prevalence of Self-Reported Obesity Among U.S. Adults by StateCenters for Disease Control and Prevention [Internet]. Atlanta (GA) [updated 2014 Sept 9; cited 2014 Sep 24]. Available from:

      2. WHO Obesity and overweight World Health Organization [Internet]. c2014 [updated 2014 Aug; cited 2014 Sept 24]. Obesity and overweight. Available from:

        • Schueler B.A.
        • Vrieze T.J.
        • Bjarnason H.
        • et al.
        An investigation of operator exposure in interventional radiology.
        RadioGraphics. 2006; 26: 1533-1541
        • McCaffrey J.P.
        • Shen H.
        • Downton B.
        • et al.
        Radiation attenuation by lead and non-lead materials used in radiation shielding garments.
        Med Phys. 2007; 34: 530-537
        • Klein L.W.
        • Tra Y.
        • Garratt K.N.
        • et al.
        • Society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions
        Occupational health hazards of interventional cardiologists in the current decade: Results of the 2014 SCAI membership survey.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015; 86: 913-924
        • Klein L.W.
        • Miller D.L.
        • Balter S.
        • et al.
        • Joint inter-society task force on occupational hazards in the interventional laboratory
        Occupational health hazards in the interventional laboratory: Time for a safer environment.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009; 20: 147-152
        • Moore B.
        • van Sonnenberg E.
        • Casola G.
        • et al.
        The relationship between back pain and lead apron use in radiologists.
        Am J Roentgenol. 1992; 158: 191-193
        • Eder H.
        • Panzer W.
        • Schöfer H.
        Is the lead-equivalent suited for rating protection properties of lead-free radiation protective clothing?.
        Rofo. 2005; 177: 399-404
        • Schöpf T.
        • Pichler T.
        Radiation protection clothing in x-ray diagnostics—influence of the different methods of measurement on the lead equivalent and the required mass.
        Rofo. 2016; 188: 768-775
        • Vaño E.
        • Gonzalez L.
        • Fernandez J.M.
        • et al.
        Occupational radiation doses in interventional cardiology: a 15-year follow-up.
        Br J Radiol. 2006; 79: 383-388
        • Peters S.M.
        • Zweers D.
        • de Lange F.
        • et al.
        Lead composite vs. nonlead protective garments: Which are better? A multivendor comparison.
        Radiat Prot Dosim. 2017; 10: 1-6
        • Schmid E.
        • Panzer W.
        • Schlattl H.
        • et al.
        Emission of fluorescent x-radiation from non-lead based shielding materials of protective clothing: A radiobiological problem?.
        J Radiol Prot. 2012; 32: N129-N139
        • McCaffrey J.P.
        • Mainegra-HingE
        • Shen H.
        “Optimizing non-Pb radiation shielding materials using bi-layers,”.
        Med Phys. 2009; 36: 5586-5594
        • McCaffrey J.P.
        • Tessier F.
        • Shen H.
        Radiation shielding materials and radiation scatter effects for interventional radiology (IR) physicians.
        Med Phys. 2012; 39: 4537-4546
      3. International Electrotechnical Commission Protective devices against diagnostic medical X-radiation – Part 1: Determination of attenuation properties of materials. IEC 61331-1 (2014). Geneva
      4. Protective devices against diagnostic medical X-radiation—Part 1: Determination of attenuation properties of materials (IEC 61331-1:2014); German version EN 61331-1:2014. Available at:

        • Eder H.
        • Schlattl H.
        • Hoeschen C.
        X-Ray protective clothing: Does DIN 6857-1 allow an objective comparison between lead-free and lead-composite materials?.
        Rofo. 2010 May; 182: 422-428
      5. Protective devices against diagnostic medical X-radiation—Part 3: Protective clothing, eyewear and protective patient shields. EC 61331-3:2014. IEC. Geneva

      6. Maghrabia A, Vijayana A, Wanga L. Design of seamless knitted radiation shielding garments with 3D body scanning technology. Procedia Technology 2015; (20):123-132

        • Vañó E.
        • González L.
        • Guibelalde E.
        • et al.
        Radiation exposure to medical staff in interventional and cardiac radiology.
        Br J Radiol. 1998; 71: 954-960
        • ICRP Publication 85
        Avoidance of radiation injuries from medical interventional procedures.
        Ann ICRP. 2000; 30: 1-72
      7. ICRP. Draft Report for Consultation: Occupational Radiological Protection in Interventional Procedures. (accessed August 9, 2017)

        • ICRP Publication 103
        The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
        Ann ICRP. 2007; 37: 1-328
      8. NCRP 1993. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Limitation of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation, NCRP Report No. 116 (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland)
      9. NCRP 2004. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Structural shielding design for medical x-ray imaging facilities, NCRP Report No. 147 (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland)
      10. NCRP 2011. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. radiation dose management for fluoroscopically-guided interventional medical procedures. NCRP Report No. 147 (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, Maryland)
        • Muir S.
        • McLeod R.
        • Dove R.
        Light-weight lead aprons-light on weight, protection, or labeling accuracy?.
        Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2005; 28: 128-130
        • Christodoulou E.G.
        • Goodsitt M.M.
        • Larson S.C.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of the transmitted exposure through lead equivalent aprons used in a radiology department, including the contribution from backscatter.
        Med Phys. 2003; 30: 1033-1038
        • Chou L.
        • Chandran S.
        • Harris A.
        • et al.
        Increased breast cancer prevalence among female orthopedic surgeons.
        J Women’s Health. 2012; Vol. 21: 683-689