ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2017
Implementation of respiratory-gated VMAT on a Versa HD linear accelerator.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demonstration of motion-compensated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy on an MR-linac.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical application of real-time tumor-tracking for stereotactic volumetric modulated arc therapy for liver tumors.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Measurement of the temporal latency of a respiratory gating system using two distinct approaches.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The accurate delivery of respiratory-gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans presents a challenge since the gantry rotation and collimator leaves must be repeatedly stopped and set into motion during each breathing cycle. In this study, we present the commissioning process for an Anzai gating system (AZ-733VI) on an Elekta Versa HD linear accelerator and make recommendations for successful clinical implementation. The commissioning tests include central axis dose consistency, profile consistency, gating beam-on/off delay, and comparison of gated versus nongated gamma pass rates for patient-specific quality assurance using four clinically commissioned photon energies: 6 MV, 6 FFF, 10 MV, and 10 FFF. The central axis dose constancy between gated and nongated deliveries was within 0.6% for all energies and the analysis of open field profiles for gated and nongated deliveries showed an agreement of 97.8% or greater when evaluated with a percent difference criteria of 1%. The measurement of the beam-on/off delay was done by evaluating images of a moving ball-bearing phantom triggered by the gating system and average beam-on delays of 0.22-0.29 s were observed. No measurable beam-off delay was present. Measurements of gated VMAT dose distributions resulted in decrements as high as 9% in the gamma passing rate as compared to nongated deliveries when evaluated against the planned dose distribution at 3%/3 mm. By decreasing the dose rate, which decreases the gantry speed during gated delivery, the gamma passing rates of gated and nongated treatments can be made equivalent. We present an empirically derived formula to limit the maximum dose rate during VMAT deliveries and show that by implementing a reduced dose rate, a gamma passing rate of greater than 95% (3%/3 mm) was obtained for all plan measurements.
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.