Trial reportPloS one2018
Radiation exposure dose and influencing factors during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishing discard criteria for lead aprons using deep learning-based quantification of defect area on X-ray fluoroscopic video.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- Article
- Managing radiation safety and protection in gastroenterology in Japan: insights from the REX-GI study.Journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Patient Radiation Exposure during Enteroscopy-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Surgically Altered Anatomy (with Video).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Minimizing radiation exposure in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a review for medical personnel.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- How should radiation exposure be handled in fluoroscopy-guided endoscopic procedures in the field of gastroenterology?Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022Review
- Does ERCP position matter? A randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy and complications of left lateral versus prone position (POSITION study).Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Comparison of Radiation Exposure between Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy and Hepaticogastrostomy with Antegrade Stenting.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Reference Levels for Fluoroscopy-guided Gastrointestinal Procedures in Japan from the REX-GI Study: A Nationwide Multicentre Prospective Observational Study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2022Article
- The radiation doses and radiation protection on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures.The British journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Radiation exposure dose of fluoroscopy-guided gastrointestinal procedures: A single-center retrospective study.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Observational
- Utilization of a new technology of 3D biliary CT for ERCP-related procedures: a case report.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Observational
- Article
- Correction: Radiation exposure dose and influencing factors during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVarious endoscopic procedures under fluoroscopic guidance are being rapidly adopted, and radiation exposure is considered to be increasing. However, there is little concern about this issue in gastroenterology practice. This study aims to evaluate the actual radiation exposure dose (RD) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and the factors affecting the RD.
methodsIn this retrospective, single-center cohort study of 1157 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP between October 2012 and February 2017, we analyzed the influences of patient characteristics, procedure time (min), total fluoroscopy time (min), type of processing engine, experience of the endoscopist, and type of disease on the total RD (mGy).
resultsThe median procedure times were 28 min for common bile duct stones (CBDS), 25 min for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), and 30 min for proximal MBO. Similarly, the median fluoroscopy times were 10.3, 8.8, and 13.4 min, and the median RDs were 167, 123, and 242 mGy, respectively. Proximal MBO required significantly longer procedure time and fluoroscopy time and resulted in greater RD than distal MBO (P = 0.0006, <0.0001, <0.0001) and CBDS (P = 0.015, <0.0001, <0.0001). Multiple linear regression showed that distal MBO and a novel processing engine negatively correlate with RD (P = 0.04, <0.0001) and that proximal MBO positively correlates with RD (P = 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Procedure time and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer for proximal MBO than for CBDS and distal MBO. The type of disease and processing engine significantly influenced the RD during ERCP.
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.