ArticleScientific reports2025
Robotic radiation shielding system reduces radiation-induced DNA damage in operators performing electrophysiological procedures.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Innovative radiation protection system enables reduction in the weight of lead aprons during electrophysiological procedures.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fluoroscopically guided electrophysiology (EP) procedures expose operators to low doses of ionizing radiation, which can induce DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and raises increasing concerns regarding potential health risks. A novel robotic radiation shielding system (RSS) was developed to provide full-body protection by encapsulating the imaging beam and blocking scattered radiation. This study aimed to compare the levels of blood lymphocytes expressing DSB markers, pATM and γ-H2AX, in operators performing EP-procedures with and without RSS. Radiation dose exposure was significantly higher without RSS (p = 0.0278). The level of cells expressing pATM and γ-H2AX was linear correlated with radiation exposure, with neither marker detected at doses below 13.4 µSv. Without RSS, the level of pATM or γ-H2AX positive cells increased significantly immediately after the procedure (8.6-fold, p < 0.0001 and 3.4-fold, p = 0.0279, respectively). After 4 h, marker levels were moderately reduced, and at 24 h, pATM returned to baseline and γ-H2AX decreased to 1.9-fold over baseline (p = 0.9739). In contrast, with RSS, no significant elevation in pATM or γ-H2AX positive cells was observed, suggesting no significant DSB formation. In conclusion, the use of an effective full-body protection system during fluoroscopically guided EP-procedures may help mitigate DSB formation and reduce the genotoxic health risks for operators.
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.