ArticleInterventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan)2020
Radiation Exposure of Interventional Radiologists during Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous Cryoablation.
Article in Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous thermal ablation for renal cell carcinoma: a comprehensive review of current evidence and future directions.La Radiologia medica · 2026Review
- Applications of artificial intelligence in interventional oncology: An up-to-date review of the literature.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The principal aim of this study was to evaluate radiation exposure of interventionalists during computed tomography (CT) fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) using radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeters (RPLDs). The radioprotective effects of safety glasses and lead apron were also evaluated. Materials and Methods: Radiation exposure of interventionalists during 46 CT fluoroscopy-guided PCA procedures was evaluated. Entrance surface dose (ESD) was measured using RPLDs on multiple sites: five sites, representing eye lens exposure; five sites, representing body exposure; and four sites, representing skin exposure. The ESD values on multiple sites were compared between different PCA procedures (renal, liver, and bone). Results: The mean ESD on the X-ray-side hand exhibited the highest value (358.8 μGy). Regarding evaluation sites representing exposure to the eye lens, the highest ESD inside the radiation protective glasses was detected on the X-ray-side cheek (167.1 μGy). Most ESD values among multiple sites (10/14) were linearly correlated with CT fluoroscopy time. Among them, the ESD values measured during renal and liver PCA were relatively higher than those measured during bone PCA, especially on the chest area outside the lead apron, and on the X-ray tube-side elbow and hand during renal and bone PCA. Radioprotective effects of safety glasses and lead apron ranged from 44.6 to 50.6% and from 30.2 to 79.6%, respectively, on each evaluation site. Conclusion: The site with the highest radiation exposure on interventionalists during CT fluoroscopy-guided PCA was the X-ray tube-side hand. Radiation exposure of interventionalists was at acceptable levels and consistent with the recommended dose limits.
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.