ArticleIndian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India
Radiation Safety Assessment of 177Lu-DOTATATE Intra-arterial Peptide Receptor Therapy (PRRT).
Article in Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Materials and Methods: Radiation safety-related data of 31 patients who underwent 177Lu-DOTATATE intra-arterial PRRT treatment were used for this study. The exposure rate was measured at the hand and eye and chest level of treating intervention radiologists continuously from the beginning to the end of the administration. Exposure from the patient at the body surface (at the level of liver, thigh, and extremities) and 1 m from the body surface was measured just after the administration. The mean radiation exposure from the patient at the body surface and 1 m from the body was also calculated. Results: The mean administered activity was found to be 194 (±17) mCi. The mean radiation exposure at the surface at the level of the liver, thigh, and feet and at 1 m from the surface was found to be 100 (±25.11), 9 (±1.27), 5.6 (±0.52), and 5.3± (0.50) μSv/hr, respectively. The mean administration time was found to be 23 ± 5.6 min. The mean radiation dose to the hands, and eyes, of the treating intervention radiologist per procedure, was found to be 6.425 ± 2.75 μSv, 5.43 ± 1.76 μSv and 1-m exposure from the patient was found to be 5.3 ± 0.246 μSv, respectively. Conclusion: Our result shows that the radiation exposure from the patient postadministration is below the permissible limit of discharge. The radiation exposure to the intervention radiologist is also suggestive of a safe procedure to be performed by maintaining the radiation dose well within the permissible limit for radiation professionals.
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.