ArticlePloS one2018
Workload implications for clinic workflow with implementation of three-dimensional printed customized bolus for radiation therapy: A pilot study.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three-dimensional printing in radiation oncology: A systematic review of the literature.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2020Pooled it
- Enhancing inguinal tumor treatment outcomes with a customized 3D-printed bolus.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Application of 3D printing for personalized boluses in radiotherapy: a systematic review.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025Review
- Comprehensive clinical implementation, workflow, and FMEA of bespoke silicone bolus cast from 3D printed molds using open-source resources.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Additive manufacturing of patient specific bolus for radiotherapy: large scale production and quality assurance.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical experience in the use of 3D printing as a rapid replacement of traditional radiation therapy immobilization materials.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- 3D-printed bolus ensures the precise postmastectomy chest wall radiation therapy for breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- 3D-printed bolus improves dose distribution for veterinary patients treated with photon beam radiation therapy.The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2020Article
- Scalp and Cranium Radiation Therapy Using Modulation (SCRUM) and Bolus.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bolus is commonly used in radiation therapy to improve radiation dose distribution to the target volume, but commercially available products do not always conform well to the patient surface. Tumor control may be compromised, particularly for superficial tumors, if bolus does not conform well and air gaps exist between the patient surface and the bolus. Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology allows the creation of highly detailed, variable shaped objects, making it an attractive and affordable option for customized, patient-specific bolus creation. The use of 3D printing in the clinical setting remains limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the implications on time and clinical fit using a workflow for 3D printing of customized bolus in companion animals with spontaneous tumors treated with radiation therapy. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the time required to create a clinical 3D printed bolus. The secondary aims were to evaluate the clinical fit of the bolus and to verify the skin surface dose. Time to segmentation and 3D printing were documented, while the clinical fit of the bolus was assessed in comparison to the bolus created in the treatment planner. The mean and median time from segmentation to generation of 3D printed boluses was 6.15 h and 5.25 h, respectively. The 3D printed bolus was significantly less deviated from the planned bolus compared to the conventional bolus (p = 0.0078) with measured dose under the bolus within 5% agreement of expected dose in 88% of the measurements. Clinically acceptable 3D printed customized bolus was successfully created for treatment within one working day. The most significant impact on time is the 3D printing itself, which therefore has minimal implications on personnel and staffing. Quality assurance steps are recommended when implementing a 3D printing workflow to the radiotherapy clinic.
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.