A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Optimizing the Angiography Protocol to Reduce Radiation Dose in Uterine Artery Embolization: The Impact of Digital Subtraction Angiographies on Radiation Exposure. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: The aim was to compare a protocol of uterine artery embolization (UAE) consisting in three digital subtraction angiographies (DSAs)-Group A, with a protocol based on a single DSA-Group B.

Materials And Methods: This is a single-center prospective randomized study enrolling 20 women (mean age 41 years, range 22-55 years) with uterine fibroids treated with UAE, from January 2015 to February 2016. All UAEs were performed by two interventional radiologists using the same angiography machine. Protocol of Group A consisted in three DSA runs (non-selective pelvic view and selective uterine views before and after embolization). Protocol of Group B consisted in 1 DSA run: selective UA angiography before embolization. (Fluoroscopic roadmap was used for UA catheterization; fluoroscopy storage was used as control after embolization.) Each patient was randomized to receive Protocol A in one pelvic side and Protocol B on the other.

Results: All patients received bilateral UAE. Mean fluoroscopy time for UA catheterization was 11.3 ± 3.7 s. (Protocol A) and 9.93 ± 2.99 s. (Protocol B) (p = 0.19). Fluoroscopy dose for catheterization and embolization was not different between both protocols (p = 0.14). Identification of the UA origin score was similar in both protocols (median error = 0, p = 0.79). Mean dose area product (DAP) was 40859 mGy/cm (Protocol A) and 28839 mGy/cm (Protocol B) (p = 0.003). Mean effective dose (ED) decreased from Protocol A (14.6 mSv) to Protocol B (9.2 mSv; - 37%). Mean absorbed dose (AD) to ovaries and uterus, respectively, decreased of 53% and 55% from Protocol A to Protocol B.

Conclusion: Reducing the number of DSA runs from 3 to 1 during UAE allows at least a 30% reduction on radiation exposure, without compromising technical outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-021-03032-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

protocol
15
uterine artery
8
artery embolization
8
digital subtraction
8
subtraction angiographies
8
radiation exposure
8
protocol group
8
group consisted
8
dsa runs
8
embolization
6

Similar Publications