ArticleSpine surgery and related research2025
Occupational Radiation Exposure for a Spinal Interventionalist Performing Fluoroscopic Selective Nerve Root Block: A Cadaveric Study.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Awareness of the harmful effects of long-term low-dose radiation is increasing. There are few comprehensive reports that accurately evaluate the radiation exposure dose to spinal interventionalists during selective nerve root block (SNRB). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiation exposure doses from C-arm fluoroscopy to different body areas of the interventionalist and to assess the effectiveness of lead-equivalent protective gear in reducing radiation exposure during SNRB. Methods: Seven fresh cadavers were irradiated for 1 and 3 minutes using C-arm fluoroscopy to stimulate the real clinical setting of SNRB. The X-ray source was positioned both under and over the table. Radiation exposure doses were measured using real-time dosimeters. Lead-equivalent protective gear was placed on each body part (crystalline lens, thyroid gland, chest, non-dominant hand, dominant hand, gonads, and foot). Results: Scatter radiation exposure doses to the upper body of the interventionalist were much higher when the X-ray source was positioned over the table compared to when it was positioned under the table. Use of X-ray protective gear reduced radiation exposure to the interventionalist regardless of the X-ray source position. The direct radiation dose to the hand in the irradiated field was extremely high when the X-ray source was positioned over the table-approximately 85 times higher than when under the table. Notably, hand doses remained extremely high even when the interventionalist wore protective gloves, although X-ray-protective-gear reduced overall radiation exposure. Conclusions: This is the first report to quantify both scattered and direct radiation doses to each body part, as well as the reduction effect of using X-ray protective gear, in detail using fresh cadavers instead of patients. Spinal interventionalists should preferentially use an under-table X-ray source during SNRB and should consistently wear adequate X-ray-protective gear to minimize occupational radiation exposure.
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.