Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29405126›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2018

Evaluation of the UF/NCI hybrid computational phantoms for use in organ dosimetry of pediatric patients undergoing fluoroscopically guided cardiac procedures.

Emily L Marshall, David Borrego, Trung Tran, James C Fudge, Wesley E Bolch

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emily L MarshallJ. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7995-0671
David BorregoJ. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9868-5113
Trung TranJ. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
James C FudgeUF Health Congenital Heart Center, Division of Pediatric Cardiology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Wesley E BolchJ. Crayton Pruitt Family Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7175-9968
University of Florida · USNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of Florida Health · US

Funding

In-Clinic Assessment of Organ Doses for Interventional Fluoroscopic ProceduresF31CA159464 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI BORREGO, DAVID · 2010 to 2015
$180k
NCI NIH HHS F31 CA159464
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epidemiologic data demonstrate that pediatric patients face a higher relative risk of radiation induced cancers than their adult counterparts at equivalent exposures. Infants and children with congenital heart defects are a critical patient population exposed to ionizing radiation during life-saving procedures. These patients will likely incur numerous procedures throughout their lifespan, each time increasing their cumulative radiation absorbed dose. As continued improvements in long-term prognosis of congenital heart defect patients is achieved, a better understanding of organ radiation dose following treatment becomes increasingly vital. Dosimetry of these patients can be accomplished using Monte Carlo radiation transport simulations, coupled with modern anatomical patient models. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the University of Florida/National Cancer Institute (UF/NCI) pediatric hybrid computational phantom library for organ dose assessment of patients that have undergone fluoroscopically guided cardiac catheterizations. In this study, two types of simulations were modeled. A dose assessment was performed on 29 patient-specific voxel phantoms (taken as representing the patient's true anatomy), height/weight-matched hybrid library phantoms, and age-matched reference phantoms. Two exposure studies were conducted for each phantom type. First, a parametric study was constructed by the attending pediatric interventional cardiologist at the University of Florida to model the range of parameters seen clinically. Second, four clinical cardiac procedures were simulated based upon internal logfiles captured by a Toshiba Infinix-i Cardiac Bi-Plane fluoroscopic unit. Performance of the phantom library was quantified by computing both the percent difference in individual organ doses, as well as the organ dose root mean square values for overall phantom assessment between the matched phantoms (UF/NCI library or reference) and the patient-specific phantoms. The UF/NCI hybrid phantoms performed at percent differences of between 15% and 30% for the parametric set of irradiation events. Among internal logfile reconstructed procedures, the UF/NCI hybrid phantoms performed with RMS organ dose values between 7% and 29%. Percent improvement in organ dosimetry via the use of hybrid library phantoms over the reference phantoms ranged from 6.6% to 93%. The use of a hybrid phantom library, Monte Carlo radiation transport methods, and clinical information on irradiation events provide a means for tracking organ dose in these radiosensitive patients undergoing fluoroscopically guided cardiac procedures.

Indexed as

Models, AnatomicPhantoms, ImagingAdolescentCardiac CatheterizationChildChild, PreschoolFemaleFluoroscopyHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMonte Carlo MethodOrgans at RiskRadiation DosageRadiation, Ionizing

Identifiers

PMID29405126
PMCPMC6385893
OpenAlexW2791819856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.