ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2020
Prediction of conical collimator collision for stereotactic radiosurgery.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A quantitative framework for patient-specific collision detection in proton therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to predict the collision clearance distance of stereotactic cones with treatment setup devices in cone-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). The BrainLAB radiosurgery system with a Frameless Radiosurgery Positioning Array and dedicated couch top was targeted in this study. The positioning array and couch top were scanned with CT simulators, and their outer contours of were detected. The minimum clearance distance was estimated by calculating the Euclidian distances between the surface of the SRS cones and the nearest surface of the outer contours. The coordinate transformation of the outer contour was performed by incorporating the Beam's Eye View at a planned arc range and couch angle. From the minimum clearance distance, the collision-free gantry ranges for each couch angle were sequentially determined. An in-house software was developed to calculate the clearance distance between the cone surface and the outer contours, and thus determine the occurrence of a collision. The software was extensively tested for various combinations of couch and arc angles at multiple isocenter locations for two combinations of cone-couch systems. A total of 50 arcs were used to validate the calculation accuracies of the software for each system. The calculated minimum distances and collision-free angles from the software were verified by physical measurements. The calculated minimum distances were found to agree with the measurements to within 0.3 ± 0.9 mm. The collision-free arc angles from the software also agreed with the measurements to within 1.1 ± 1.1° with a 5-mm safety margin for 20 arcs. In conclusion, the in-house software was able to calculate the minimum clearance distance with <1.0 mm accuracy and to determine the collision-free arc range for the cone-based BrainLab SRS system.
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.