ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Your C-Arm May Be Dose Optimised but Is Your Surgical Procedure? The Evaluation and Dose Optimisation of Positioning Aids Used in Paediatric Image Guided Surgery.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPositioning aids are frequently used in image guided surgery (IGS). This study evaluates the impact of positioning aids on radiation dose and image quality (IQ) in IGS and the potential for dose optimised imaging via the choice of positioning aid type selected for clinical use.
methodsFoam and gel positioning aids were evaluated in this study. Anthropomorphic phantoms were used to simulate clinically relevant procedures. Patient and staff radiation exposure were estimated via incident air kerma rate and scatter dose rate measurements, respectively. Perspex phantoms were used to assess the impact of the positioning aid location within the field of view (FOV) on radiation dose, via the reference entrance point air kerma rate displayed on the C-arm. IQ was analysed objectively via contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) measurements.
resultsAn average dose rate reduction of 24% and 27% were measured for the simulated patient and surgeon locations, respectively, when gel was replaced with foam, over all anthropomorphic phantom sizes and procedures. A maximum increase in dose rate of 3% for foam and 57% for gel were calculated with a change in positioning aid location within the FOV. In most instances, an improvement in CNR and SNR was observed with the replacement of gel with foam positioning aids.
conclusionThe present study demonstrates that the choice of positioning aids used in IGS can significantly impact radiation dose and IQ. With collaboration between radiographers and the perioperative team, it is recommended sites optimise their selection of positioning aids in IGS.
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.