MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416186307 · doi:10.1016/j.shj.2025.100756

Performance of a Dedicated Radioprotection Cabin for the Interventional Echocardiographer During Structural Heart Procedures

2025· article· en· W4416186307 on OpenAlexafffund
François Magniez, Luis Ammour, Pierre‐Guillaume Piriou, Nicolas Piriou, D. Stevant, Quentin Bernard, Laurianne Le Gloan, Philippe Jaafar, Vincent Letocart, Julien Plessis, Thibaut Manigold, Robin Le Ruz, Pierre Yves Turgeon, Patrice Guérin

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Heart · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NantesFaculté de Médecine, Université LavalUniversité Laval
KeywordsFluoroscopyRadiation exposureInterventional cardiologyDose area productRadiation doseLead apronIonizing radiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Structural heart procedures performed under fluoroscopy and transesophageal echocardiography guidance require the expertise of an interventional echocardiographer in the heart team. Due to the proximity with the radiation source, the physician might be exposed to high radiation doses. This study aims to assess the interventional echocardiographer radioprotection by means of a dedicated cabin and evaluate its ergonomic characteristics. Methods: This is an observational nonrandomized study comparing cumulative radiation exposure between a control arm, consisting of a standard lead glass panel, and the experimental arm using the dedicated radioprotective Echosafe cabin. All structural heart procedures requiring transesophageal echocardiography between July 2021 and April 2022 were included. Cumulative radiation exposure of the interventional echocardiographer was collected by the body part and the satisfaction of the heart team with the cabin was assessed with a questionnaire. Results: = 0.94). The use of the cabin resulted in a numerically lower cumulative radiation dose to each body part. The mean overall reduction in radiation dose was estimated to be between 56 and 78% with the cabin. The most frequent negative aspects reported by the cabin users included difficulty moving the transesophageal echocardiography probe and the physical burden associated with initial installation. Conclusions: This preliminary study suggests that radioprotection of the interventional echocardiographer can be increased during structural procedures by using a dedicated cabin. Further studies with larger sample sizes and different design will be needed to confirm the reduction in irradiation of the echocardiographer.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural HeartSame topicRadiation Dose and ImagingFrench-language works237,207