ArticleThe Journal of urology2013
Effective and organ specific radiation doses from videourodynamics in children.
Article in The Journal of urology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Videourodynamics - role, benefits and optimal practice.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- The Role of Video Urodynamics in the Management of the Valve Bladder.Current urology reports · 2017Review
- Comparison of image quality and radiation dose between an image-intensifier system and a newer-generation flat-panel detector system — technical phantom measurements and evaluation of clinical imaging in children.Pediatric radiology · 2016Article
- Paediatric urodynamic studies: emerging technologies and new frontiers.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEffective and organ specific doses of ionizing radiation during videourodynamics are unknown. We estimated radiation exposure in children undergoing videourodynamics, and identified patient and examination factors that contribute to higher dosing. MATERIALS AND
methodsFluoroscopy data were collected from consecutive patients undergoing videourodynamics. Documented dose metrics were used to calculate entrance skin dose after applying a series of correction factors. Effective doses and organ specific doses (ovaries/testes) were estimated from entrance skin dose using Monte Carlo methods on a mathematical anthropomorphic phantom (ages 0, 1, 5, 10 and 15 years). Regression analysis was performed to determine patient and procedural factors associated with higher dosing.
resultsA total of 100 children (45% male, mean ± SD age 9.3 ± 5.7 years) were studied. Diagnoses included neurogenic bladder (73%), anatomical abnormality (14%) and functional/nonneurogenic disorder (13%). Mean fluoroscopy time was 0.17 ± 0.12 minutes. Mean age adjusted entrance skin dose, effective dose, and testis and ovary doses were 2.18 ± 2.00 mGy, 0.07 ± 0.05 mSv, 0.09 ± 0.10 mGy and 0.20 ± 0.13 mGy, respectively. On univariate analysis age, height, weight, body mass index, bladder capacity and fluoroscopy time were associated with effective dose. On multivariate adjusted analysis, body mass index, bladder capacity and fluoroscopy time were independently associated with effective dose.
conclusionsThe average effective dose of ionizing radiation from videourodynamics was less compared to voiding cystourethrogram dose reported in the literature. Greater fluoroscopy time, body mass index and bladder capacity are independently associated with higher dosing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.