ArticleThe British journal of radiology2019
Impact factors for safety, success, duration and radiation exposure in CT-guided interventions.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spectral shaping technology reduces the radiation dose of CT-guided lung tumor microwave ablation.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Modulating CT Attenuation of Polyvinyl Alcohol Cryogels for Individualized Training Phantoms in Interventional Radiology: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- CT-guided percutaneous marking of small pulmonary nodules with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- First experience of efficacy and radiation exposure in 320-detector row CT fluoroscopy-guided interventions.The British journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Impact of interventionalist's experience and gender on radiation dose and procedural time in CT-guided interventions-a retrospective analysis of 4380 cases over 10 years.European radiology · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aim to compare factors influencing safety, success rate and radiation dose of CT-guided biopsies and drainages in a non-teaching setting with experienced operators
methodsA total of 1021 cases were retrospectively analyzed regarding lesion size, distance from skin, procedure duration, radiation dose, complications and clinical success. Procedures were grouped into biopsies of lung, liver, (remaining) abdomen, musculoskeletal system (MSK) and drainages of any region. Procedures in non-teaching setting were performed by experienced operators (full time interventional radiology staff), teaching setting consisted of residents under supervision of interventional radiology staff.
resultsOverall clinical success rate was 93.6 % [experienced (exp.)
conclusionCT guided interventions can be performed safe und successful disregarding anatomical parameters or teaching setting. Depth from skin and teaching setting should be taken into account both from a clinical and a time-conscious point of view since they increase radiation dose and prolong operations. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first study with >1000 interventions which shows and quantifies the impact of lesion depth and teaching setting in CT-guided interventions.
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.