ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2017
A comparison between hydrogel spacer and endorectal balloon: An analysis of intrafraction prostate motion during proton therapy.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of rectal displacement devices in managing prostate motion: a systematic review.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2021Pooled it
- Perirectal spacers and endorectal balloons in external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a review of prospective studies.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Review
- The impact of bladder and rectal dynamics on prostate and seminal vesicles intrafraction motion and deformation in radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Fiducial tracking fidelity in robotic prostate SBRT: a comparison of a 3-fraction boost following pelvic nodal irradiation and definitive 5-fraction treatment.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Is an Endorectal Balloon Beneficial for Rectal Sparing after Spacer Implantation in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Proton Beam Therapy? A Dosimetric and Radiobiological Comparison Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Impact of intrafraction changes in delivered dose of the day for prostate cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy via MR-Linac.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2022Article
- Intrafraction Prostate Motion Management for Ultra-Hypofractionated Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Injection of hydrogel spacer increased maximal intrafractional prostate motion in anterior and superior directions during volumetric modulated arc therapy-stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering: Addressing Key Design Needs Toward Clinical Translation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Long-term follow-up results of endorectal balloon-assisted helical tomotherapy for localized prostate cancer patients in the high-risk group of gastrointestinal adverse events.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022Article
- Prostate Cancer Treatment with Pencil Beam Proton Therapy Using Rectal Spacers sans Endorectal Balloons.International journal of particle therapy · 2022Article
- Stereotactic body radiation therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer in men with underlying inflammatory bowel disease.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2021Article
- Preliminary analysis of prostate positional displacement using hydrogel spacer during the course of proton therapy for prostate cancer.Journal of radiation research · 2021Article
- Impact of hydrogel peri-rectal spacer insertion on prostate gland intra-fraction motion during 1.5 T MR-guided stereotactic body radiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
- Comparison of rectal dose reduction by a hydrogel spacer among 3D conformal radiotherapy, volumetric-modulated arc therapy, helical tomotherapy, CyberKnife and proton therapy.Journal of radiation research · 2020Article
- CBCT evaluation of inter- and intra-fraction motions during prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy: a technical note.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Article
- Hydrogel Spacer Reduces Rectal Dose during Proton Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Dosimetric Analysis.International journal of particle therapy · 2019Article
- A novel model to correlate hydrogel spacer placement, perirectal space creation, and rectum dosimetry in prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2018Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate intrafraction prostate motion in patients treated with proton therapy and an endorectal balloon or a hydrogel spacer using orthogonal x-rays acquired before and after each treatment field. This study evaluated 10 patients (662 fields throughout treatment) treated daily with an endorectal balloon (ERB) and 16 patients (840 fields throughout treatment) treated with a hydrogel spacer (GEL) without an ERB. Patient shifts were recorded before and after each treatment field, correlated with a treatment time, using x-ray imaging and implanted fiducial alignment. For each shift, recorded in X, Y, and Z, a 3D vector was calculated to determine the positional change. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean vector shift between ERB (0.06 cm) and GEL (0.09 cm), (P < 0.001). The mean includes a large number of zero shifts, but the smallest non-zero shift recorded was 0.2 cm. The largest shifts were, on average, in the Z direction (anterior to posterior). The average Z shift was +0.02 cm for both ERB and GEL. There was no statistical difference between ERB and GEL for shifts greater than 0.3 cm (P = 0.13) or greater than 0.5 cm (P = 0.36). For treatment times between 5 and 9 min, a majority of shifts were less than 0.2 cm, 85.9% for ERB and 73.2% for GEL. There was a significant positive correlation between the vector shifts and field time for both ERB (r = 0.2, P < 0.001) and GEL (r = 0.07, P < 0.04). We have shown that prostate motion is clinically comparable between an ERB and a hydrogel spacer, and the time dependencies are similar. A large majority of shifts for both ERB and hydrogel are well within a typical robust planning margin. For GEL patients, we chose to maintain slightly larger planning margins than for ERB due to already improved rectal sparing with GEL.
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.