ArticleEuropean radiology2017
DNA damage in lymphocytes induced by cardiac CT and comparison with physical exposure parameters.
Article in European radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biological effects ofEuropean radiology · 2026Observational
- From Exposure to Effect: Genetic and Epigenetic Biomarker-Guided Risk Assessment in Cardiac Imaging.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Development and clinical application of biological dosimetry technology: insights from the HICARE/IAEA 2025 international training course.Journal of radiation research · 2026Article
- Cytogenetic Effects in Patients after Computed Tomography Examination.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Radiobiological risks following dentomaxillofacial imaging: should we be concerned?Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2021Review
- DNA double-strand breaks of human peripheral blood lymphocyte induced by CT examination of oral and maxillofacial region.Clinical oral investigations · 2020Article
- DNA double-strand breaks in blood lymphocytes induced by two-dayEuropean radiology · 2018Article
- Estimation of the effects of medical diagnostic radiation exposure based on DNA damage.Journal of radiation research · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether physical exposure parameters such as the dose index (CTDI), dose length product (DLP), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) are predictive of DNA damage.
methodsIn vitro, we scanned a phantom containing blood samples from five volunteers at CTDI 50, 100, and 150 mGy. One sample was not scanned. We also scanned samples in three different-size phantoms at CTDI 100 mGy. In vivo, we enrolled 45 patients and obtained blood samples before and after cardiac CT. The γ-H2AX foci were counted.
resultsIn vitro, in the control and at CTDI 50, 100, and 150 mGy, the number of γ-H2AX was 0.94 ± 0.24 (standard error, SE), 1.28 ± 0.30, 1.91 ± 0.47, and 2.16 ± 0.20. At SSDE 180, 156, and 135 mGy, it was 2.41 ± 0.20, 1.91 ± 0.47, and 1.42 ± 0.20 foci/cell. The γ-H2AX foci were positively correlated with the radiation dose and negatively correlated with the body size. In vivo, the γ-H2AX foci were significantly increased after CT (from 1.21 ± 0.19 to 1.92 ± 0.22 foci/cell) and correlated with CTDI, DLP, and SSDE.
conclusionsDNA damage was induced by cardiac CT. There was a correlation between the physical exposure parameters and γ-H2AX. KEY POINTS: • DNA damage was induced by radiation exposure from cardiac CT. • The γ-H2AX foci number was correlated with the CT radiation dose. • Physical exposure parameters reflect the DNA damage by CT radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27510626What 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.