Introduction: The development of interventional radiology has made it possible to perform many minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Due to the constant development of technology and catheter materials, the number of indications for such procedures is also increasing. As a result of longer and more complex procedures, a relatively high dose may be present, so adequate protection of both patients and medical staff is required. Purpose: The purpose of the study was to identify differences in the effectiveness of protection of different aprons in clinical environment and on the basis of the obtained results to select aprons that provide adequate protection at the lowest possible weight. Methods: We conducted an experimental study on six different two-piece aprons. Measurements were performed in two ways. In the first method, we tested the aprons in the primary beam on a Siemens MULTIX TOP X-ray machine in energy ranges of 50, 70, 90 and 121 kV. In the second method, we tested the aprons in the scattered beam on a Philips Allura Xper FD 20 diascope machine in energy ranges of 80, 100 and 120 kV. Measurements were performed using two Piranha RTI semiconductor detectors. For measurements in the scattered beam, we used a 24 cm × 20 cm plexiglass phantom that simulated the patient. The obtained data were then statistically analyzed. Results: The results of measurements of the back of the aprons in the primary beam showed differences between all aprons. Apron 1 had the best protective value and apron 2 the worst. When testing the front in primary beam, among the aprons of the same thickness of the protective thickness (0.5 mm), the apron 2 was again the worst, while in the energy range corresponding to tube voltage of 50 kV, the best were the aprons 1 and 6. In all other energy ranges, apron 6 was the best. Also in the measurements in the scattered beam we find that the apron 6 has the best protective properties, while the apron 2 has the worst. We found a negative correlation in all aprons, showing that less heavy aprons also have poorer protective performance. Discussion and conclusion: Our measurements confirmed that there are statistically significant differences between protective aprons. Protective aprons that contain lead are not always statistically significantly better than those that do not contain it. There is a relationship between the weight of the protective apron and its protective effectiveness. With this type of testing of protective aprons, we can make appropriate purchases of these in the future.