ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021
The Accuracy of Individualized 3D-Printing Template-Assisted I
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Seven-year follow-up demonstrating sustained survival followingOncology letters · 2026Article
- Article
- 3D-Printed Devices in Interventional Radiotherapy (Brachytherapy) Applications: A Literature Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- The evolving landscape of head and neck brachytherapy: A scoping review.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Efficacy and safety of 3D printing coplanar template-assisted iodine-125 seed implantation as palliative treatment for inoperable pancreatic cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2022Article
- The efficacy and safety ofFrontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Stereotactic Ablative Brachytherapy: Recent Advances in Optimization of Radiobiological Cancer Therapy.Cancers · 2021Review
- Chinese Expert Consensus on IodineFrontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- A Case of Iodine 125 Seeds (I-125) Responding to Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the accuracy of individualized 3D-printing template-assisted I MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom February 2017 to January 2020, clinical data of 41 patients (mean age, 58.5 ± 16.1 years; 28 males) with recurrent (48.8%)/metastatic (51.2%) head and neck cancer underwent individualized 3D-PT assisted I
resultsAll seed needles were inserted manually in a single attempt with the technical success rate of 100% without major perioperative complications. The mean needle's entrance deviation was 0.090 cm (95% Confidence Interval, 0.081-0.098). The mean intraoperative depth and angle of the needle were consistent with that of planned (6.23 ± 0.24 vs. 6.21 ± 0.24 cm, p = 0.903; 83.14 ± 3.64 vs. 83.09 ± 3.66 degrees, p = 0.985, respectively). The mean deviation between the needle's planned and intraoperative depth and angle was 0.168 ± 0.024 cm and 1.56 ± 0.14 degrees, respectively. The postoperative dosimetry parameters, including D90, D100, V100, V150, V200, conformity index, external index, and homogeneity index, were all well-coordinated with planned dosimetry without significant difference (p = 0.515, 0.662, 0.958, 0.865, 0.872, 0.278, 0.456, and 0.989, respectively).
conclusionsWithin the limitation of this study, individualized 3D-PT assisted I CLINICAL
trial registration[website], identifier [registration number].
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.