Cumulative Radiation dose in Patients with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia and Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the cumulative effective dose (CED) of radiation from medical imaging and intervention in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) who have pulmonary arteriovenous malformations and to identify clinical factors associated with exposure to high levels of radiation. METHODS: All patients with at least 1 pulmonary arteriovenous malformation were identified from the dedicated patient database of a tertiary HHT referral centre. Computerized imaging and electronic patient records were systematically examined to identify all imaging studies performed from 1989-2010. The effective dose was determined for each study, and CED was calculated retrospectively. RESULTS: Among 246 patients (mean age, 53 years; 62.2% women) with a total of 2065 patient-years, 3309 procedures that involved ionizing radiation were performed. CED ranged from 0.2-307.6 mSv, with a mean of 51.7 mSv. CED exceeded 100 mSv in 26 patients (11%). Interventional procedures and computed tomography (CT) were the greatest contributors, which accounted for 51% and 46% of the total CED, respectively. Factors associated with high cumulative exposure were epistaxis (odds ratio 2.7 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.3]; P = .02), HHT-related gastrointestinal bleeding (odds ratio 2.0 [95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.8]; P = .04) and number of patient-years (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HHT are exposed to a significant cumulative radiation dose from diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Identifiable subsets of patients are at increased risk. A proportion of patients receive doses at levels that are associated with harm. Imaging indications and doses should be optimized to reduce radiation exposure in this population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".