ArticleThe Permanente journal2023
Quantifying Radiation Doses in Common Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Scenarios: An Evaluation of Radiation Safety Measures in a Real-World Environment.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining standards for fluoroscopy in gastrointestinal endoscopy using Delphi methodology.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Radiation safety training remains variable among gastroenterologists performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study sought to ascribe dosimeter readings to various real-world ERCP scenarios to provide data supporting the 3 pillars of radiation safety: distance, time, and shielding. Methods An ERCP fluoroscopy unit was used to generate radiation scatter from 2 differently sized anthropomorphic phantoms. Radiation scatter was measured at various distances from the emitter, with and without a lead apron, and at various frame rates (measured in frames per second, fps) and degrees of fluoroscopy pedal actuation. An image quality phantom was used to assess resolution at various frame rates and air gaps. Results Increasing the distance resulted in a decrease in measured scatter (from 0.75 mR/h at 1.5 ft to 0.15 mR/h at 9 ft with the average phantom and from 50 mR/h at 1.5 ft to 3.06 mR/h at 9 ft with the large phantom). Depressing the fluoroscopy pedal less frequently, or decreasing the frame rate (ie, increasing the time per frame), resulted in a linear decrease in scatter (from 55 mR/h at 8 fps to 24.5 mR/h at 4 fps and 13.60 mR/h at 2 fps). Providing shielding through the presence of a 0.5-mm lead apron reduced scatter (from 4.10 to 0.11 mR/h with the average phantom; from 15.30 mR/h to 0.43 mR/h with the large phantom). However, decreasing the frame rate from 8 fps to 2 fps did not change the number of line pairs identified on the image phantom. A greater air gap increased the number of line pairs resolved. Conclusions Implementing the 3 pillars of radiation safety led to a quantifiable, clinically significant decrease in radiation scatter. The authors hope that these findings spark greater implementation of radiation safety measures among practitioners utilizing fluoroscopy.
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.