Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33178950›Full record

ArticleBJR open2019

Radiation dosimetry changes in radiotherapy treatment plans for adult patients arising from the selection of the CT image reconstruction kernel.

Anne T Davis, Sarah Muscat, Antony L Palmer, David Buckle, James Earley, Matthew G J Williams, Andrew Nisbet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJR open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anne T Davis
Sarah MuscatDepartment of Medical Physics, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK.
Antony L Palmer
David BuckleDepartment of Medical Physics, Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust Reading, UK.
James EarleyDepartment of Medical Physics, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK.
Matthew G J WilliamsDepartment of Medical Physics, Velindre University NHS Trust, Cardiff, UK.
Andrew Nisbet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe reconstruction kernel used for a CT scan strongly influences the image quality. This work investigates the changes in Hounsfield units (HUs) which can arise when altering the image reconstruction kernel for planning CT images and the associated changes in dose in the radiotherapy treatment plan if the treatment planning system (TPS) is not re-calibrated.

methodsHead and neck, prostate and lung CT images from four centres were used. For a specific scan, the base image was acquired using the original reconstruction kernel (used when the TPS was calibrated) and the treatment plan produced. The treatment plan was applied to all images from the other reconstruction kernels. Differences in dose-volume metrics for the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs) were noted and HU differences between images measured for air, soft tissue and bone.

resultsHU change in soft tissue had the greatest influence on dose change. When within ±20 HU for soft tissue and ±50 HU for bone and air the dose change in the PTV and OAR was within ±0.5% and ±1% respectively.

conclusionsWhen imaging parameters were changed, if HU change was within ±20 HU for soft tissue and ±50 HU for bone and air, the change in the PTV and OAR doses was below 1%. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The degree of dose change in the treatment plan with HU change is demonstrated for current TPS algorithms. This adds to the limited evidence base for recommendations on HU tolerances as a tool for radiotherapy CT protocol optimization.

Identifiers

PMID33178950
PMCPMC7592475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.