ArticlePediatric radiology2017
Radiation dose associated with CT-guided drain placement for pediatric patients.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date, there are limited radiation dose data on CT-guided procedures in pediatric patients.
objectiveOur goal was to quantify the radiation dose associated with pediatric CT-guided drain placement and follow-up drain evaluations in order to estimate effective dose. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched the electronic medical record and picture archiving and communication system (PACS) to identify all pediatric (<18 years old) CT-guided drain placements performed between January 2008 and December 2013 at our institution. We compiled patient data and radiation dose information from CT-guided drain placements as well as pre-procedural diagnostic CTs and post-procedural follow-up fluoroscopic abscess catheter injections (sinograms). Then we converted dose-length product, fluoroscopy time and number of acquisitions to effective doses using Monte Carlo simulations and age-appropriate conversion factors based on annual quality-control testing.
resultsFifty-two drainages were identified with mean patient age of 11.0 years (5 weeks to 17 years). Most children had diagnoses of appendicitis (n=23) or inflammatory bowel disease (n=11). Forty-seven patients had diagnostic CTs, with a mean effective dose of 7.3 mSv (range 1.1-25.5 mSv). Drains remained in place for an average of 16.9 days (range 0-75 days), with an average of 0.9 (0-5) sinograms per patient in follow-up. The mean effective dose for all drainages and follow-up exams was 5.3 mSv (0.7-17.1) and 62% (32/52) of the children had effective doses less than 5 mSv.
conclusionThe majority of pediatric patients who have undergone CT-guided drain placements at our institution have received total radiation doses on par with diagnostic ranges. This information could be useful when describing the dose of radiation to parents and providers when CT-guided drain placement is necessary.
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.