These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
135 related items for PubMed ID: 19151079
1. Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention by radial and femoral routes. Patrizi R, Sciahbasi A, Summaria F, Lioy E. Eur Heart J; 2009 Apr; 30(7):866. PubMed ID: 19151079 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Comment on 'Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions by radial and femoral routes'. Agostoni P, Testa L, Biondi-Zoccai GG. Eur Heart J; 2008 Nov; 29(22):2820-1. PubMed ID: 18826985 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Randomized comparison of operator radiation exposure during coronary angiography and intervention by radial or femoral approach. Lange HW, von Boetticher H. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2006 Jan; 67(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 16331696 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of operator radiation exposure with optimized radiation protection devices during coronary angiograms and ad hoc percutaneous coronary interventions by radial and femoral routes. Lo TS, Zaman AG, Stables R, Fraser D, Oldryod KG, Hildick-Smith D, Nolan J. Eur Heart J; 2008 Sep; 29(17):2180. PubMed ID: 18562304 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Reduction of operator radiation dose by a pelvic lead shield during cardiac catheterization by radial access: comparison with femoral access. Lange HW, von Boetticher H. JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2012 Apr; 5(4):445-9. PubMed ID: 22516403 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of radiation dose to operator between transradial and transfemoral coronary angiography with optimised radiation protection: a phantom study. Liu H, Jin Z, Jing L. Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2014 Mar; 158(4):412-20. PubMed ID: 24162374 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of access site selection and operator expertise on radiation exposure; a controlled prospective study. Lo TS, Ratib K, Chong AY, Bhatia G, Gunning M, Nolan J. Am Heart J; 2012 Oct; 164(4):455-61. PubMed ID: 23067901 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Comments on "A randomized study comparing the use of a pelvic lead shield during trans-radial interventions: Threefold decrease in radiation to the operator but double exposure to the patient". Jones AK. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2015 Nov; 86(5):958-9. PubMed ID: 25914315 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. [Secondary ionizing radiation generated by digital and analog coronary cineangiographic equipment: influence of external systems of radiologic protection]. Ramírez A, Farias E, Silva AM, Oyarzún C, Leyton F, Ugalde H, Dussaillant G, Cumsille MA. Rev Med Chil; 2000 Aug; 128(8):853-62. PubMed ID: 11129546 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Response to comment on "a randomized study comparing the use of a pelvic lead shield during trans-radial interventions: Threefold decrease in radiation to the operator but double exposure to the patient". Roguin A, Musallam A, Rappaport B. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2015 Nov; 86(5):960. PubMed ID: 25914301 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Occupational radiation exposure in femoral artery approach is higher than radial artery approach during coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention. Kim JS, Lee BK, Ryu DR, Chun K, Kwon HS, Nam SR, Kim DI, Lee SY, Jeong JO, Bae JW, Park JS, Ahn Y, Chae JK, Yoon MH, Lee SH, Yoon J, Gwon HC, Choi D, Kwon SM, Roh YH, Cho BR. Sci Rep; 2020 Apr 28; 10(1):7104. PubMed ID: 32346022 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]