Clinically proven

Azurion with ClarityIQ technology

What is ClarityIQ technology?

Our imaging technology ClarityIQ, combines advanced, real-time image noise reduction algorithms with state-of-the-art hardware. Together, they form a flexible digital imaging pipeline designed to perform individual image processing algorithms more efficiently. This unlocks superb visualization and significant dose reduction capabilities for healthcare facilities. ClarityIQ is available as an option on Azurion systems.

Learn more about ClarityIQ (1.58MB)

Key benefits of ClarityIQ technology

Significantly lower patient dose at equivalent image quality
Proven reduction in staff radiation exposure
Fast – no noticeable delay between acquisition and display

Philips image-guided therapy system scores high in multi-vendor study.^a This study identifies differences between image-guided therapy systems from different vendors. It may pave a path for standardization in radiation dose usage and acceptable image quality for similar procedures.

Read the full study here (1.76MB)

Key benefits of ClarityIQ technology

Significantly lower patient dose at equivalent image quality
Proven reduction in staff radiation exposure
Fast – no noticeable delay between acquisition and display

Read the full study here (1.76MB)

Clinically proven outcomes across interventional areas

ClarityIQ is clinically proven to deliver significantly lower dose – based on 37 multiple peer-reviewed clinical studies with over
19.000 patients^1-38,b-d

Select an area of interest and discover more about ClarityIQ study findings in this area.

Interventional cardiology

16 studies

11629 patients

Key findings

L. Eloot, et al. – In diagnostic coronary angiography, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 75% while maintaining diagnostic image quality, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^4d
T. Ten Cate, et al.– In cardiac cine, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 53% while maintaining equivalent image quality, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^5d
L.R. Dekker, et al. – In EP procedures, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 43%, compared to a system without ClarityIQ. ^13d

The typical DAP values that I normally used to achieve in PCI procedures was around 40 to 60 Gycm2 but now with ClarityIQ, my typical DAP values are around 12 to 25 Gycm².”

Dr. H. Gehlmann

Head of Cardiac Catheterization Dept, UMC St. Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

I think now this is the gold standard for interventional cardiology, for structural interventions – for sure. I have no doubt about that”

Dr. B. Garcia

Interventional Cardiologist, Hospital Vall d’Hebron, Barcelona, Spain

Download all clinical papers (156.0KB)

Discover where cardiology clinical studies for ClarityIQ took place

Cardiology

clinical studies

USA

Japan

USA

Aurora, CO - 268 patients

New York, NY - 3223 patients

Chicago, IL - 400 patients

Los Angeles, CA - 762 patients

You are about to visit a Philips global content page

Continue

Cardiology

clinical studies

Interventional radiology

18 studies

6167 patients

Key findings

M.J.L. van Strijen, et al. – In iliac DSA, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 83% while maintaining equivalent image quality, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^10d
R.F.F. van den Haak, et al. – In aortoiliac endovascular procedures ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 72%, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^11d

X. Wen, et al. - In repetitive TACE procedures ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 50% while maintaining image quality, compared to a system without ClarityIQ ^16,d,l

Q.M. de Ruiter, et al. – In EVAR procedures ClarityIQ technology reduced radiation by 61%, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^9d
R.F.F. van den Haak, et al. – In EVAR procedures ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 57% compared to a system without ClarityIQ. ^11d

“Another important finding was that the image quality of DSA runs by means of subjective assessment of hepatic vessel visualization was not affected by the significant reduction of radiation exposure.”¹⁵

“The results obtained herein show a substantial reduction in the dose of radiation to patients and staff in the hybrid OR suite after the introduction of the new ClarityIQ technology without having to change the standard way of working".¹¹

Download all clinical papers (154.0KB)

Discover where radiology clinical studies for ClarityIQ took place

Radiology

clinical studies

USA

China

USA

Baltimore, MD - 78 patients

Baltimore, MD - 54 patients

San Francisco, CA - 135 patients

Philadelphia, PA - 26 patients

Philadelphia, PA - 4381 patients

New York, NY - 58 patients

Boston, MA - 66 patients

Miami, FL - 239 patients

Dallas, TX - 234 patients

Cincinnati, OH - 355 patients

You are about to visit a Philips global content page

Continue

Radiology

clinical studies

Interventional neuroradiology

3 studies

1872 patients

Key findings

Söderman M, et al – In Neuro DSA, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 75% while maintaining equivalent image quality, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^1d
Söderman M, et al – In interventional neuro procedures, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 65%, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^2d
Söderman M, et al – In diagnostic neuro procedures, ClarityIQ technology reduces patient dose by 62%, compared to a system without ClarityIQ.^2d

We had three readers and it turned out that all three readers actually valued the image quality from the reduced dose better than the original images.”

Dr. M. Söderman

Interventional Neuroradiologist, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

This dose reduction is, at least in my mind a real quantum leap in reducing the dose and improving thereby the procedure both for the patient and for us. I think it's really fantastic."

Dr. T. Andersson

Interventional Neuroradiologist, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

Download all clinical papers (137.0KB)

Discover where neuroradiology clinical studies for ClarityIQ took place

Neuroradiology

clinical studies

USA

Sweden

Contact information

* This field is mandatory

Maa

Etunimi*

Etunimi (foneettinen)

Sukunimi*

Sukunimi (foneettinen)

Tervehdys

Akateeminen titteli

Sähköpostiosoite*

Puhelin (esim. +358 9 1234 5678)

Yritys*

Työtitteli

Toimiala

Tehtävä

Erikoisala

Osasto

Osavaltio tai provinssi

Kaupunki

Osoite

Postinumero

By specifying your reason for contact we will be able to provide you with a better service.

We work with partners and distributors who may contact you about this Philips product on our behalf.

Seurantatiedot

Haluan että minuun otetaan yhteyttä

Paras aika soittaa

Arvioitu ajankohta ostolle

Kommentit

I hereby consent to processing of my personal data and sensitive personal data (if any) and transfer of such data abroad, in accordance with the Privacy Notice that can be found here.

What is cross border data transfer?

I agree on cross-border transfer of personal information.

I hereby agree to receive by email or telephone information about Philips products, services, events and promotions, including information by mail that is appropriate to me, taking into account my activities and preferences, including the Expectations I have indicated / and in this form.

I agree that Philips may share my personal information with authorized resellers of its Philips products and equipment in order to meet my expectations as stated in this form.

Haluan vastaanottaa sähköisesti markkinointimateriaalia Philipsin tuotteista, palveluista, tapahtumista ja tarjouksista, jotka perustuvat kiinnostuksen kohteisiini. Voin peruuttaa suostumukseni milloin tahansa.

Final CEE consent

Footnotes

Footnotes

1.      Dekker, L.R., et al., New image processing and noise reduction technology allows reduction of radiation exposure in complex electrophysiologic interventions while maintaining optimal image quality: a randomized clinical trial. Heart Rhythm, 2013. 10(11): p. 1678-82.

2.      Bracken, J.A., et al., A Radiation Dose Reduction Technology to Improve Patient Safety During Cardiac Catheterization Interventions. J Interv Cardiol, 2015. 28(5): p. 493-7.

3.      Durrani, R.J., et al., Radiation dose reduction utilizing noise reduction technology during uterine artery embolization: a pilot study. Clinical Imaging, 2016. 40(3): p. 378-381.

4.      de Ruiter, Q.M., et al., AlluraClarity Radiation Dose-Reduction Technology in the Hybrid Operating Room During Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. J Endovasc Ther, 2016. 23(1): p. 130-8.

5.      Dave, J.K., et al., A Phantom Study and a Retrospective Clinical Analysis to Investigate the Impact of a New Image
Processing Technology on Radiation Dose and Image Quality during Hepatic Embolization. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2016. 27(4): p. 593-600.

6.      Eloot, L., et al., Novel X-ray imaging technology enables significant patient dose reduction in interventional cardiology while maintaining diagnostic image quality. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2015. 86(5): p. E205-12.

7.      Haas, N.A., et al., Substantial radiation reduction in pediatric and adult congenital heart disease interventions with a novel X-ray imaging technology. IJC Heart & Vasculature, 2015. 6: p. 101-109.

8.      Kohlbrenner, R., et al., Patient Radiation Dose Reduction during Transarterial Chemoembolization Using a Novel X-Ray Imaging Platform. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2015. 26(9): p. 1331-1338.

9.      Lauterbach, M. and K.E. Hauptmann, Reducing Patient Radiation Dose With Image Noise Reduction Technology in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Procedures. The American Journal of Cardiology, 2016. 117(5): p. 834-838.

10. Nakamura, S., et al., Patient radiation dose reduction using an X-ray imaging noise reduction technology for cardiac angiography and intervention. Heart Vessels, 2015.

11. Schernthaner, R.E., et al., A new angiographic imaging platform reduces radiation exposure for patients with liver cancer treated with transarterial chemoembolization. European radiology, 2015. 25(11): p. 3255-3262.

12. Söderman, M., et al., Image noise reduction algorithm for digital subtraction angiography: clinical results. Radiology, 2013. 269(2): p. 553-60.

13. Söderman, M., et al., Radiation dose in neuroangiography using image noise reduction technology: a population study
based on 614 patients. Neuroradiology, 2013. 55(11): p. 1365-1372.

14. Strauss, K.J., et al., Estimates of diagnostic reference levels for pediatric peripheral and abdominal fluoroscopically guided procedures. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2015. 204(6): p. W713-9.

15. ten Cate, T., et al., Novel X-ray image noise reduction technology reduces patient radiation dose while maintaining image quality in coronary angiography. Netherlands Heart Journal, 2015. 23(11): p. 525-530.

16. van den Haak, R.F., et al., Significant Radiation Dose Reduction in the Hybrid Operating Room Using a Novel X-ray Imaging Technology. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2015. 50(4): p. 480-6.

17. van Strijen, M.J., et al., Evaluation of a Noise Reduction Imaging Technology in Iliac Digital Subtraction Angiography: Noninferior Clinical Image Quality with Lower Patient and Scatter Dose. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2015. 26(5): p. 642-650.e1.

18. Wen, X., et al., Novel X-Ray Imaging Technology Allows Substantial Patient Radiation Reduction without Image Quality
Impairment in Repetitive Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Academic Radiology, 2015. 22(11): p. 1361-1367.

19. Alsafi, A., et al., Adrenal Vein Sampling: Radiation Dose Reduction on New Angiography Platform. The Arab Journal of Interventional Radiology, 2020. 4(02): p. 102-106.

20. Balter, S., et al., Novel radiation dose reduction fluoroscopic technology facilitates chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary interventions. EuroIntervention, 2017. 13(12): p. e1468-e1474.

21. Baumann, F., et al., The Effect of a New Angiographic Imaging Technology on Radiation Dose in Visceral Embolization
Procedures. Vasc Endovascular Surg, 2017. 51(4): p. 183-187.

22. Busse, T., J. Reifart, and N. Reifart, Influence of novel X-ray imaging technology on radiation exposure during
chronic total occlusion procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2018. 92(7): p. 1268-1273.

23. Buytaert, D., et al., Evaluation of patient and staff exposure with state of the art x ray technology in cardiac catheterization: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Interventional Cardiology, 2018. 31(6): p. 807-814.

24. Faroux, L., et al., Minimizing exposure to radiation in invasive cardiology using modern dose-reduction technology: Evaluation of the real-life effects. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2018. 91(7): p. 1194-1199.

25. Gislason-Lee, A.J., et al., Impact of latest generation cardiac interventional X-ray equipment on patient image quality and radiation dose for trans-catheter aortic valve implantations. Br J Radiol, 2016. 89(1067): p. 20160269.

26. Gunja, A., et al., Image noise reduction technology reduces radiation in a radial-first cardiac catheterization laboratory. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine, 2017. 18(3): p. 197-201.

27. Kastrati, M., et al., Reducing Radiation Dose in Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Using Image Noise Reduction Technology. Am J Cardiol, 2016. 118(3): p. 353-6.

28. Kirkwood, M.L., et al., New image-processing and noise-reduction software reduces radiation dose during complex endovascular procedures. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 2016. 64(5): p. 1357-1365.

29. Schernthaner, R.E., et al., Characteristics of a New X-Ray Imaging System for Interventional Procedures: Improved Image Quality and Reduced Radiation Dose. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2018. 41(3): p. 502-508.

30. Spink, C., et al., Noise reduction angiographic imaging technology reduces radiation dose during bronchial artery embolization. European Journal of Radiology, 2017. 97: p. 115-118.

31. Spink, C., et al., Radiation dose reduction during transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt implantation using a new imaging technology. European Journal of Radiology, 2017. 86: p. 284-288.

32. Stangenberg, L., et al., Modern Fixed Imaging Systems Reduce Radiation Exposure to Patients and Providers. Vasc
Endovascular Surg, 2018. 52(1): p. 52-58.

33. Sullivan, P.M., et al., Reduction in Radiation Dose in a Pediatric Cardiac Catheterization Lab Using the Philips AlluraClarity X-ray System. Pediatric Cardiology, 2017. 38(8): p. 1583-1591.

34. Thomaere, E., et al., A new imaging technology to reduce the radiation dose during uterine fibroid embolization. Acta Radiol, 2018. 59(12): p. 1446-1450.

35. Trunz, L.M., et al., Investigation of Radiation Dose Estimates and Image Quality Between Commercially Available Interventional Fluoroscopy Systems for Fluoroscopically Guided Interventional Procedures. Acad Radiol, 2021. 28(11): p. 1559-1569.

36. van der Marel, K., et al., Reduced Patient Radiation Exposure during Neurodiagnostic and Interventional X-Ray Angiography with a New Imaging Platform. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2017. 38(3): p. 442-449.

37. van Dijk, J.D., et al., Impact of new X-ray technology on patient dose in pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantations. J Interv Card Electrophysiol, 2017. 48(1): p. 105-110.

38. Stecker, M.S., et al., Guidelines for Patient Radiation Dose Management. Journal of Vascular and Interventional
Radiology, 2009. 20(7): p. S263-S273.

a)      Investigator initiated, interventional radiology study at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA, equipped with Philips image guided therapy system with ClarityIQ technology and comparable Siemens Artis Q image guided therapy systems. Phantom study investigated differences in system-reported radiation dose estimates, cumulative air kerma (CAK) and kerma area product (KAP), for 4,381 clinical procedures. In clinical study, two blinded interventional radiologists reviewed image quality for Philips and Siemens systems with same patients, same procedures and same physicians. Subset analysis with 40 patients undergoing repeat embolization of the same lobe of the liver, performed by the same physician.

b)      In 37 individual comparative studies, Philips ClarityIQ was associated with reductions in patient radiation exposure.^1-37

c)      Relationship between radiation exposure and risk of complications, long-term health risk, procedure time and patient characteristics, procedure complexity, as reported in medical guidelines.³⁸

d)      The results of the application of dose reduction techniques will vary depending on the clinical task, patient size, anatomical location and clinical practice. The interventional radiologist assisted by a physicist as necessary has to determine the appropriate settings for each specific clinical task.