ArticleCell biochemistry and biophysics2024
Assessment of Biological Damage Induced during Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) Examination.
Article in Cell biochemistry and biophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) is known for its non-invasiveness, fast procedure, and also for providing detailed diagnostic information to physicians. It also utilises low-dose-rate ionising radiation (X-rays) as a source for imaging. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is an advanced system that uses iodinated contrast media for more accurate diagnostic results. Studies suggest using these contrasts will lead to greater radiation adsorption with significant DNA damage. No studies have been taken comparing the physical dose with the biological effect. The present study sheds light on the same by assessing the biological effect of CT with and without contrast intervention. The present study is timebound; thus, 21 participants attending for CT thorax and abdomen with no history of any cancer were included. The same participants underwent both pre-contrast and post-contrast studies. The blood sample was taken before the procedure and used as a control. Physical parameters like DLP and CTDI obtained from the instrument were compared with the MN frequency obtained (CBMN Assay). The study showed a significant increase (p-value < 0.05) in the Physical and MN frequency in the Post-Contrast group compared to the pre-contrast group. Although a positive correlation was observed between pre and post-contrast groups, the results were not found to be statistically significant (p-value < 0.05). The study confirms increased physical dose and MN frequency upon contrast intervention. This study recommends the judicial use of MDCT in disease diagnostics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38858307What 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.