The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Eye Lens Exposure to Radiation in Interventional Suites: Caution Is Warranted
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report estimated radiation doses to the eye lens of the interventionalist from procedures performed with and without use of radiation protection measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Scattered radiation doses for seven interventional radiology fluoroscopic systems were measured by using phantoms simulating patients 16-28 cm in thickness undergoing low-, medium-, and high-mode fluoroscopy, cine cardiac imaging, and digital subtraction angiography (DSA). The radiation doses to the eye lens in low- and high-dose scenarios were estimated. Beam angulation, biplanar equipment, working distance, procedure complexity, imaging collimation, and use of eyeglasses and/or protective suspended screens were taken into account. The doses to the lens in several procedures were assessed. RESULTS: Mean scattered radiation doses to the lens during fluoroscopy were 6.0 and 34.5 microSv/min in the low- and high-dose scenarios, respectively. For DSA, typical doses to the lens ranged from 0.77 to 3.33 microSv per image. Operation modes involving increasing or decreasing radiation doses were quantified. For hepatic chemoembolization, iliac angioplasty, pelvic embolization, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation, lens doses ranged from 0.25 to 3.72 mSv per procedure when protection was not used. Lens doses in the neuroembolization procedures could exceed 10 mSv per procedure. CONCLUSION: With typical reported workloads, radiation doses to eye lenses may exceed the threshold for deterministic effects (ie, lens opacities or cataracts) after several years of work if radiation protection tools are not used.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Stewart, F. A., Akleyev, A. V., Hauer-Jensen, M., Hendry, J. H., Kleiman, N. J., MacVittie, T. J., Aleman, B. M., Edgar, A. B., Mabuchi, K., Muirhead, C. R., et al. (2012) · Annals of the ICRP · doi:10.1016/j.icrp.2012.02.001 · Cited by 1,604
Radiation safety program for the cardiac catheterization laboratory
E. Chambers, C., A. Fetterly, K., Holzer, R., Paul Lin, P., C. Blankenship, J., Balter, S., & K. Laskey, W. (2011) · Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · doi:10.1002/ccd.22867 · Cited by 301
Metadata
- Authors
- Vano, E., Gonzalez, L., Fernández, J. M., & Haskal, Z. J.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 248
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 945-953
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2061085483
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Eye Lens Exposure to Radiation in Interventional Suites: Caution Is Warranted. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2482071800
- The paper
- Vano, E., Gonzalez, L., Fernández, J. M., & Haskal, Z. J. (2008). Eye Lens Exposure to Radiation in Interventional Suites: Caution Is Warranted. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2482071800
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.