ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Estimating brain and eye lens dose for the cardiologist in interventional cardiology-are the dose levels of concern?
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. 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.
- Two Central Nervous System Tumors in One Catheter Lab: Time to Rethink Radiation Protection.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Exposure Time Dependence of Operators' Head Entrance Air Kerma in Interventional Radiology Measured by TLD-100H Chips.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Predictive modeling of eye lens dose in interventional radiology: a polynomial regression approach to cumulative fluoroscopy dose.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo establish conversion coefficients (CCs), between mean absorbed dose to the brain and eye lens of the cardiologist and the air kerma-area product, PKA, for a set of projections in cardiac interventional procedures. Furthermore, by taking clinical data into account, a method to estimate the doses per procedure, or annual dose, is presented.
methodsThermoluminescence dosimeters were used together with anthropomorphic phantoms, simulating a cardiologist performing an interventional cardiac procedure, to estimate the CCs for the brain and eye lens dose for nine standard projections, and change in patient size and x-ray spectrum. Additionally, a single CC has been estimated, accounting for each projections fraction of use in the clinic and associated PKA using clinical data from the dose monitoring system in our hospital.
resultsThe maximum CCs for the eye lens and segment of the brain, is 5.47 μGy/Gycm2 (left eye lens) and 1.71 μGy/Gycm2 (left brain segment). The corresponding weighted CCs: are 3.39 μGy/Gycm2 and 0.89 μGy/Gycm2, respectively.
conclusionsConversion coefficients have been established under actual scatter conditions, showing higher doses on the left side of the operator. Using modern interventional x-ray equipment, interventional cardiac procedures will not cause high radiation dose levels to the operator when a ceiling mounted shield is used, otherwise there is a risk that the threshold dose values for cataract will be reached. ADVANCE IN KNOWLEDGE: In addition to the CCs for the different projections, methods for deriving a single CC per cardiac interventional procedure and dose per year were introduced.
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.