ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2024
Radiation Doses to the Entire Catheterization Laboratory Team With a Novel Radiation Protection Device.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Radiation-Attenuating Drape on Exposure in a Contemporary Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: The ATTENUATE Trial.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Incorporating of an enhanced radiation protection device into the treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarctions: A single center retrospective analysis.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- SCAI/ASE/HRS/SIR/SVS Expert Consensus Statement on Enhanced Radiation Protection: Time for Mandatory and Urgent Action.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- ALARA+: Summit on Radiation and Orthopedic Risks in Fluoroscopic Laboratories.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Suspended Lead Suits and Radiation Exposure in Interventional Echocardiographers.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Relative Contribution of High-Dose Outliers to Cumulative Occupational Radiation Dose in the Catheterization Laboratory.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Impact of a patient fixation device on healthcare worker radiation doses in fluoroscopy-assisted endoscopy.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2025Article
- Radiation Safety Renaissance: Will State Regulations Help or Hinder an Emergence From the Dark Ages?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Zero Radiation in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: An Aspirational Goal or Moral Imperative?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A novel radiation protection system has recently been shown to shield the primary operator from scatter radiation, but whether it shields other members of the catheterization laboratory team remains unknown. Methods: Radiation exposure data were collected prospectively in 50 coronary angiography cases, in which 25 were completed using standard radiation protection and 25 with a novel system consisting of a series of rigid shields and flexible radiation-resistant drapes. Radiation doses, measured with real-time dosimeters, were compared between the 2 groups. Results: There were no significant differences between groups with respect to patient or procedural characteristics, including air kerma ( Conclusions: Compared to standard radiation protection with lead aprons, use of a novel radiation protection system during coronary angiography was associated with significantly lower head-level radiation doses among all members of the catheterization laboratory team.
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.