Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39131971›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2024

Comprehensive Shielding System Enhances Radiation Protection for Structural Heart Procedures.

David G Rizik, Robert F Burke, Sabrina R Klassen, Ariana M Nigoghosian, Robert D Riley, Kevin P Gosselin, James A Goldstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. ALARA+: Summit on Radiation and Orthopedic Risks in Fluoroscopic Laboratories.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Review
  4. Comment on "Comparative Effectiveness of 2 Next-Generation Scatter Radiation Shielding Systems".Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  5. Radiation Safety Renaissance: Will State Regulations Help or Hinder an Emergence From the Dark Ages?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025
    Article
  6. Zero Radiation in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: An Aspirational Goal or Moral Imperative?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

David G RizikDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Robert F BurkeDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Sabrina R KlassenDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Ariana M NigoghosianDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Robert D RileyDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
Kevin P GosselinDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.
James A GoldsteinDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Honor Health, Scottsdale, Arizona.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study of radiation exposure (RE) to physicians performing structural heart procedures evaluated the efficacy of a novel comprehensive radiation shield compared to those of traditional shielding methods. A novel comprehensive shielding system (Protego, Image Diagnostics Inc) has been documented to provide superior RE protection during coronary procedures compared to that provided by a standard "drop down" shield. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of this shield in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures, which are associated with disproportionate RE to operators. Methods: This single-center, 2-group cohort, observational analysis compared RE to the primary physician operator performing TAVR using the Protego shield (n = 25) with that using a standard drop-down shield with personal leaded apparel (n = 25). RE was measured at both thyroid and waist levels with a real-time dosimetry system (RaySafe i3, RaySafe) and was calculated on a mean per case basis. Data were collected on additional procedural parameters, including access site(s) for device implantation, per case fluoroscopy time, air kerma, and patient factors, including body mass index. Between-group comparisons were conducted to evaluate RE by group and measurement sites. Results: The Protego system reduced operator RE by 99% compared to that using standard protection. RE was significantly lower at both the thyroid level (0.08 ± 0.27 vs 79.2 ± 62.4 μSv; Conclusions: The Protego shield system provides superior operator RE protection during TAVR procedures. This shield allows operators to work without the need for personal lead aprons and has potential to reduce catheterization laboratory occupational health hazards.

Indexed as

occupational hazardoccupational healthradiation safety

Identifiers

PMID39131971
PMCPMC11307704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.