ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2023
Reduction of radiation dose using real-time visual feedback dosimetry during angiographic interventions.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time dosimetry in interventional radiology - comparing the occupational radiation exposure in fluoroscopy-guided lower extremity and abdominal procedures.European radiology · 2025Article
- Real-World Reductions in Lead-Free Radiation Exposure with the Rampart System during Endovascular Procedures.The American journal of cardiology · 2025Article
- Reduction of radiation dose using real-time visual feedback dosimetry during angiographic interventions.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This prospective study sought to evaluate potential savings of radiation dose to medical staff using real-time dosimetry coupled with visual radiation dose feedback during angiographic interventions. For this purpose, we analyzed a total of 214 angiographic examinations that consisted of chemoembolizations and several other types of therapeutic interventions. The Unfors RaySafe i2 dosimeter was worn by the interventionalist at chest height over the lead protection. A total of 110 interventions were performed with real-time radiation dosimetry allowing the interventionalist to react upon higher x-ray exposure and 104 examinations served as the comparative group without real-time radiation monitoring. By using the real-time display during interventions, the overall mean operator radiation dose decreased from 3.67 (IQR, 0.95-23.01) to 2.36 μSv (IQR, 0.52-12.66) (-36%; p = 0.032) at simultaneously reduced operator exposure time by 4.5 min (p = 0.071). Dividing interventions into chemoembolizations and other types of therapeutic interventions, radiation dose decreased from 1.31 (IQR, 0.46-3.62) to 0.95 μSv (IQR, 0.53-3.11) and from 24.39 (IQR, 12.14-63.0) to 10.37 μSv (IQR, 0.85-36.84), respectively, using live-screen dosimetry (p ≤ 0.005). Radiation dose reductions were also observed for the participating assistants, indicating that they could also benefit from real-time visual feedback dosimetry during interventions (-30%; p = 0.039). Integration of real-time dosimetry into clinical processes might be useful in reducing occupational radiation exposure time during angiographic interventions. The real-time visual feedback raised the awareness of interventionalists and their assistants to the potential danger of prolonged radiation exposure leading to the adoption of radiation-sparing practices. Therefore, it might create a safer environment for the medical staff by keeping the applied radiation exposure as low as possible.
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.