ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Whole-Spine Radiography Study to Reduce Patient Exposure Dose and Artifacts Using the EOS Imaging System.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whole-spine radiography can be accomplished through two methods: (1) segmented imaging employing X-ray tube angulation and detectors, or (2) the Euronext Paris Advanced Orthopedic Solutions (EOS) 2D Imaging system that can capture the entire spine in a single image using X-ray tubes and detectors oriented at a 90-degree angle. This study aimed to establish optimal EOS examination parameters based on patient morphotype and scan speed to reduce patient radiation exposure, repeat examinations, heat stress on equipment, and X-ray tube cooling time. X-ray exposure conditions involved adjustments of scan speed ranging from two to four steps, contingent upon the patient's morphotype ('S', small body; 'M', medium body; and 'L', large body. Patient dose measurements were conducted 20 times for each set of conditions. When transitioning from an 'S' to an 'M' morphotype at a constant scan speed, the entrance skin dose (ESD) exhibited an increase of approximately 41.25 ± 4.57%. A similar change from an 'M' to an 'L' morphotype resulted in an ESD increase of roughly 59.56 ± 24.00%. A transition from an 'S' to an 'L' morphotype at the same scan speed manifested an ESD elevation of approximately 124.21 ± 26.96%. This study underscores significant variations in radiation dose, ranging from 40% to 50%, when altering morphotype while maintaining a consistent scan speed.
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.