Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28149156›Full record

ArticleSaudi journal of biological sciences2017

Patient radiation biological risk in computed tomography angiography procedure.

M Alkhorayef, E Babikir, A Alrushoud, H Al-Mohammed, A Sulieman

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi journal of biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Visualization techniques of the facial arteries.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

M AlkhorayefDepartment of Radiological Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO Box 10219, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
E BabikirDepartment of Radiological Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, PO Box 10219, Riyadh 11433, Saudi Arabia.
A AlrushoudDepartment of Medical Physics, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, PO Box 7897, Riyadh 11159, Saudi Arabia.
H Al-MohammedDepartment of Medical Technical, College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Princess Nora Bint Abdulrahman University, PO Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia.
A SuliemanPrince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Radiology and Medical Imaging Department, PO Box 422, Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia.
King Saud University · SAPrince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University · SAPrincess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University · SARiyadh Armed Forces Hospital · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computed tomography angiography (CTA) has become the most valuable imaging modality for the diagnosis of blood vessel diseases; however, patients are exposed to high radiation doses and the probability of cancer and other biological effects is increased. The objectives of this study were to measure the patient radiation dose during a CTA procedure and to estimate the radiation dose and biological effects. The study was conducted in two radiology departments equipped with 64-slice CT machines (Aquilion) calibrated according to international protocols. A total of 152 patients underwent brain, lower limb, chest, abdomen, and pelvis examinations. The effective radiation dose was estimated using ImPACT scan software. Cancer and biological risks were estimated using the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) conversion factors. The mean patient dose value per procedure (dose length product [DLP], mGy·cm) for all examinations was 437.8 ± 166, 568.8 ± 194, 516.0 ± 228, 581.8 ± 175, and 1082.9 ± 290 for the lower limbs, pelvis, abdomen, chest, and cerebral, respectively. The lens of the eye, uterus, and ovaries received high radiation doses compared to thyroid and testis. The overall patient risk per CTA procedure ranged between 15 and 36 cancer risks per 1 million procedures. Patient risk from CTA procedures is high during neck and abdomen procedures. Special concern should be provided to the lens of the eye and thyroid during brain CTA procedures. Patient dose reduction is an important consideration; thus, staff should optimize the radiation dose during CTA procedures.

Indexed as

Computed tomographyCTAEffective doseMedical exposureRadiation risk

Identifiers

PMID28149156
PMCPMC5272934
OpenAlexW2235199404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.