ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2015
Evaluation of a cone beam computed tomography geometry for image guided small animal irradiation.
Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of administering human pancreatic cancer chemotherapy in a spontaneous pancreatic cancer mouse model.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Virtual monoenergetic micro-CT imaging in mice with artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Quality Assessment of Stereotactic Radiosurgery of a Melanoma Brain Metastases Model Using a Mouselike Phantom and the Small Animal Radiation Research Platform.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2017Article
- Dosimetry in Micro-computed Tomography: a Review of the Measurement Methods, Impacts, and Characterization of the Quantum GX Imaging System.Molecular imaging and biology · 2017Review
- An image guided small animal stereotactic radiotherapy system.Oncotarget · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The conventional imaging geometry for small animal cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is that a detector panel rotates around the head-to-tail axis of an imaged animal ('tubular' geometry). Another unusual but possible imaging geometry is that the detector panel rotates around the anterior-to-posterior axis of the animal ('pancake' geometry). The small animal radiation research platform developed at Johns Hopkins University employs the pancake geometry where a prone-positioned animal is rotated horizontally between an x-ray source and detector panel. This study is to assess the CBCT image quality in the pancake geometry and investigate potential methods for improvement. We compared CBCT images acquired in the pancake geometry with those acquired in the tubular geometry when the phantom/animal was placed upright simulating the conventional CBCT geometry. Results showed signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios in the pancake geometry were reduced in comparison to the tubular geometry at the same dose level. But the overall spatial resolution within the transverse plane of the imaged cylinder/animal was better in the pancake geometry. A modest exposure increase to two folds in the pancake geometry can improve image quality to a level close to the tubular geometry. Image quality can also be improved by inclining the animal, which reduces streak artifacts caused by bony structures. The major factor resulting in the inferior image quality in the pancake geometry is the elevated beam attenuation along the long axis of the phantom/animal and consequently increased scatter-to-primary ratio in that orientation. Not withstanding, the image quality in the pancake-geometry CBCT is adequate to support image guided animal positioning, while providing unique advantages of non-coplanar and multiple mice irradiation. This study also provides useful knowledge about the image quality in the two very different imaging geometries, i.e. pancake and tubular geometry, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.