Interventional Fluoroscopy - The Impact of Radiation Exposure

[kenjixshadow]

Sorry about this b.s. thread, please close it.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Kaustikos]

Watch this in 1.5x or 2.0x to save time. Interventionists and medical students need to heed this warning.

Warning of bull****?

 

[kenjixshadow]

x

 

[colbgw02]

Kaustikos is right. The video is mostly BS. It's a great example of how a modicum of knowledge can be dangerous. If it spurs people to educate themselves on the topic, then that's great. As it is, it's an emotional ploy designed to tug on the heart strings of people uneducated on the topic.

First of all, this N of 1 who completely unscientifically decided that his carotid stenosis was due to this single cause? Yeah, that's BS of the highest order. The fact that it's coming from an accomplished surgeon doesn't make it smell any better.

Secondly, he opines that his brain tumor is also due to occupational exposure, despite the fact that the tumor type has a low association with radiation induction and the fact that the brain is notoriously radioinsensitive. Also BS.

Lastly, he never states it, but he strongly implies that he didn't use the proper protection because of "muscle spasms" or whatever.

About the only thing on that video that isn't off about are cataracts. Even interventionalists who are prudent about their protection and exposure tend to get early cataracts. And, unlike tumors or carotid stenoses, the cataracts that are induced by radiation are demonstrably different than those seen in the aged population.

 

[JP2740]

Thanks for the post, can we close the thread now

 

[Psai]

Kaustikos is right. The video is mostly BS. It's a great example of how a modicum of knowledge can be dangerous. If it spurs people to educate themselves on the topic, then that's great. As it is, it's an emotional ploy designed to tug on the heart strings of people uneducated on the topic.

First of all, this N of 1 who completely unscientifically decided that his carotid stenosis was due to this single cause? Yeah, that's BS of the highest order. The fact that it's coming from an accomplished surgeon doesn't make it smell any better.

Secondly, he opines that his brain tumor is also due to occupational exposure, despite the fact that the tumor type has a low association with radiation induction and the fact that the brain is notoriously radioinsensitive. Also BS.

Lastly, he never states it, but he strongly implies that he didn't use the proper protection because of "muscle spasms" or whatever.

About the only thing on that video that isn't off about are cataracts. Even interventionalists who are prudent about their protection and exposure tend to get early cataracts. And, unlike tumors or carotid stenoses, the cataracts that are induced by radiation are demonstrably different than those seen in the aged population.

Low association doesn't mean none. And radiation can definitely contribute to carotid stenosis. Not sure why you're being so quick to dismiss the video. You get a ton of exposure from the c arms, especially in the long aorta cases because almost everything is endovascular nowadays.

 

[preDoGuy24]

This thread makes my thyroid hurt.

 

[colbgw02]

Low association doesn't mean none. And radiation can definitely contribute to carotid stenosis. Not sure why you're being so quick to dismiss the video. You get a ton of exposure from the c arms, especially in the long aorta cases because almost everything is endovascular nowadays.

Because it's intellectually dishonest in that he (and it) is making ascientific claims. If you want to educate people about the dangers of radiation exposure, then do it. Don't appeal to emotions by telling a sob story with pseudo-science. I find it particularly egregious because the target audience is supposed to be people with occupational exposure, not the general public. Accordingly, there shouldn't have been much of a need to dumb it down.

 

[Kaustikos]

Radiation doses in interventional fluoroscopic procedures are real. Plenty of research on this topic can be found on pubmed and google scholar. Example: J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009;20:S274.
If you think this video is baloney, please feel free to provide evidence of chronic low-level exposure to ionizing radiation would not trigger cancer.

KThxBye

Everything can trigger cancer. We get it. I look at my coffee mug and wonder what plot it has in giving me laryngeopheomyolipoadenosarcosis.
Also, an n of 1. And it's from a famous CT surgeon. I have an n of 6 here at one hospital that have been doing "long aortic cases" with fluoro. Three of whom have been doing it since the damn thing was invented. This is not including the fellows and residents and nurses/techs. Should they make a video about how they haven't been victim of cancer or carotid stenosis?
Yes, fluoro is "dangerous" but don't give me this video as your way of conclusively saying it. There are plenty of papers in radiology showing that there are risks with fluoro but how negligible they are, especially with protective gear. This is also assuming that the guy in the video took every precaution to prevent exposure in every procedure, right? Because there's no way they'd fudge the facts to make this video all the more influential.

 

[Kaustikos]

Low association doesn't mean none. And radiation can definitely contribute to carotid stenosis. Not sure why you're being so quick to dismiss the video. You get a ton of exposure from the c arms, especially in the long aorta cases because almost everything is endovascular nowadays.

Yeah,
But I find fault with how the video was made. It didn't seem to be about education but deception and rhetoric meant to target your emotions. It's not the first video, nor will it be the last. But I'd be more attentive to published papers over sappy videos. If you're going to do that, hold a puppy or show a child crying.

 

[slopes23]

Radiation doses in interventional fluoroscopic procedures are real. Plenty of research on this topic can be found on pubmed and google scholar. Example: J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009;20:S274.
If you think this video is baloney, please feel free to provide evidence of chronic low-level exposure to ionizing radiation would not trigger cancer.

KThxBye

What if I don't think it's baloney but do believe it's Bologna?