Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39350833›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Radiation Exposure During Invasive Cardiovascular Procedures: Portable Shielding System Versus Standard Lead Aprons.

Husam A Noor, Noof Althawadi, Zaina Noor, Nouf AlAnsari, Tarique S Chachar, Sara Al Raisi, Nooraldaem Yousif

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06875583 (The Radiation ProtEction for Dose RedUction in the Cardiac CathEter Lab Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT06875583 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The Radiation ProtEction for Dose RedUction in the Cardiac CathEter Lab Study: The REDUCE Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorLiverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation TrustRan2025 to 2026Enrolled100ConditionsRadiation Exposure, Radiation Exposure to Operator, Radiation Injuries, Radiation SafetyArmsRadiation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Husam A NoorCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Noof AlthawadiCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Zaina NoorCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Nouf AlAnsariCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Tarique S ChacharCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Sara Al RaisiCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.
Nooraldaem YousifCardiology Department, Mohammed Bin Khalifa Specialist Cardiac Centre (MKCC), Awali, BHR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Significant progress in the field of interventional cardiology has led to a rise in percutaneous procedures and an increase in the risk of radiation exposure at the workplace. Staff health has been put at risk due to the limitations of conventional radiation protective techniques. Innovative methods, such as RAMPART, have promising prospects for enhancing radiation safety. The purpose of this study was to evaluate RAMPART's effectiveness and practicality in comparison to conventional protective techniques with a lead apron and shield (LAS) during cardiac interventional procedures. Method One hundred elective cardiac procedures were enrolled in this prospective single-center research study. Two groups were formed from the participants: standard protection (group A) and RAMPAT system (group B). Real-time dosimeters were used to track the radiation dosage, dosage reduction factor, dosage reduction percentage, and likelihood of exceeding the limit, which were included in the data. Proceduralists were urged to use different strategies to reduce exposure. The study was approved by an ethical committee and ran from June 2023 to August 2023. Results When comparing the RAMPART group to the conventional protection group, neck-level radiation exposure was considerably lower for all workers. There were no notable variations in the exposure of the waist. The RAMPART group was shown to be superior in minimizing radiation exposure, as evidenced by dose reduction metrics. The groups had comparable procedural characteristics. Conclusion Compared to conventional LAS, the RAMPART system dramatically reduces radiation exposure to the entire body.

Indexed as

aproncatheterizationleadlead apronradiationrampart

Identifiers

PMID39350833
PMCPMC11440004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.