ArticleCureus2025
Mapping of Organ Radiation Dose Distribution in Abdominal X-ray Imaging Using Optically Stimulated Luminescent Dosimeters (OSLDs).
Article in Cureus, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionX-ray imaging units often exhibit non-uniform radiation intensity across the imaging field, making accurate dose measurements challenging. This variability can impact patient safety and hinder the optimization of medical imaging procedures. Our study aims to map radiation doses in abdominal organs using optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) to enhance dose accuracy and improve the quality of patient care in diagnostic imaging. MATERIALS AND
methodsA Kyoto Kagaku phantom (Kyoto, Japan) was placed supine on the table Bucky in a posteroanterior (PA) orientation, with a source-to-image receptor distance (SID) of 100 cm. Exposures were taken at three different kilovolt peak (kVp) settings (64.5, 70, and 75) with corresponding milliampere-seconds (mAs) values of 15, 20, and 25, respectively, using both anode- and cathode-oriented beams. Multiple nanoDot OSLDs (Landauer, Glenwood, IL, US) were positioned on the phantom's surface to measure the entrance surface dose (ESD) at anatomical locations corresponding to the liver, kidneys, and spleen.
resultsESD measurements revealed a non-uniform radiation distribution across abdominal organs. Organ doses increased with rising kVp and mAs, reflecting the influence of beam energy and exposure settings. With anode-facing beam orientation, liver doses ranged from 0.47 to 2.97 mGy, with higher values in central liver regions and right kidney segments. ESD to the spleen increased from 0.63 to 1.94 mGy. Under cathode-oriented conditions, liver doses ranged from 0.88 to 3.70 mGy, while kidneys and spleen received up to 3.41 and 2.96 mGy, respectively. The highest ESDs were recorded in liver segments 2, 3, 4A, 4B, 5, and 6 as well as in the central regions of the kidneys, underscoring the influence of anatomical positioning and X-ray beam orientation. Overall, cathode-facing beams delivered up to 50% higher liver doses and twice the spleen dose compared to anode-facing beams.
conclusionsThis study confirms that radiation intensity is non-uniformly distributed across abdominal regions during X-ray imaging, with significant implications for patient safety. It demonstrates that different organs receive varying radiation doses, enhancing our understanding of organ-specific exposure during diagnostic procedures. These findings underscore the importance of optimizing imaging protocols to minimize unnecessary radiation exposure, particularly to more sensitive organs, ultimately improving patient care in diagnostic radiography.
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.