The past two decades have witnessed the development and growth of the endovascular techniques, however, this new technology is not exempt from risks, since its use requires an ionizing radiation exposure to both patients and surgeons. In this context, the long-term repercussion of this type of chronic exposure to low dose ionizing radiation of the vascular surgeons is still unknown. Although conventional dosimetry is used to monitoring the occupational radiation exposure, it doesn't take into consideration a number of individual variables such as: age, sex, exposure to other carcinogen substances or previous medical history; that may affect the radio-sensibility of each individual. Some studies suggest the use of routine cytogenetic analysis to complement the conventional dosimetry, yet the real genomic effects of chronic low dose ionizing radiation exposure is still unclear and an ideal biodosimetry marker hasn't been described. In this setting, the main objective of the present study was to determine the genomic instability associated to the chronic low dose exposure to ionizing radiation of vascular surgeons versus healthy control patients with no history of radiation exposure. The secondary endpoints were to determine the impact of demographic and clinical practice activities associated to genomic instability among both groups of patients. National, observational and transversal case control study of genomic instability among vascular surgeons chronically exposed to low dose ionizing radiation compared to healthy control patients with no previous history of radiation exposure. The peripheral blood samples of the case group were collected from vascular surgeons during the VI International Symposium of Endovascular Surgery. The blood samples were followed by a demographic and endovascular practice questionnaire. On the other hand, the samples for the control group were collected from healthy patients undergoing saphenectomy and/or phlebectomy in our department at Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid. All blood samples were send to the Cancer Investigation Center at Salamanca University where three types of genomic analysis were performed: (1) fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) study in interphase for the chromosomes 3, 7 and 17 and locus 9p21; (2) metaphase study with G banding technique; and (3) sister chromatid exchange (SCE) metaphase study.
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
The differences between cases and controls regarding chromosomal numerical aberrations during interphase using FISH technique
Timeframe: 2 years
The differences between cases and controls after G banding technique
Timeframe: 2 years
The differences between cases and controls regarding the presence of SCE during metaphase.
Timeframe: 2 years