ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2025
Shedding light on radiation exposure: Emergency vs. elective catheterization procedures in a prospective cohort study.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Cardiac catheterization employs ionizing radiation, although imaging technologies have improved safety, the influence of procedural urgency on radiation exposure has rarely been investigated. This study compares radiation parameters in elective versus emergency cardiac catheterizations. Methods: This prospective cohort study examined 108 patients (elective: 27; emergency: 81) undergoing cardiac catheterization at University Hospital between October 2014 and March 2015. All procedures were performed by a single operator utilizing the Allura Clarity X-ray system, reducing variability. Radiation metrics such as fluoroscopy time, cine time, Dose Area Product (DAP), and Air Kerma Product (KAP) were registered. Dosimeters were placed at the level of patients' heads and the level of operators' chests. Results: In the crude analysis, cine time was significantly higher in emergency procedures than in elective procedures, with a difference of 22.69 ms ( Conclusions: Procedure urgency is a significant factor in radiation exposure in cardiac catheterization. Technologies for dose reduction and protocol standardization are essential for minimizing risks to patients and providers.
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.