Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35036634›Full record

ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology

Clinical Assessment of a Novel Ring Gantry Linear Accelerator-Mounted Helical Fan-Beam kVCT System.

Christian Velten, Lee Goddard, Kyoungkeun Jeong, Madhur K Garg, Wolfgang A Tomé

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Clinical implementation of kVCT-guided tomotherapy with ClearRT.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2022
    Article
  8. The impact of the ClearRTReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022
    Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian VeltenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Lee GoddardDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Kyoungkeun JeongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Madhur K GargDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Wolfgang A ToméDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Albert Einstein College of Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess clinically relevant image quality metrics (IQMs) of helical fan beam kilovoltage (kV) fan beam computed tomography (CT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: kVCT IQMs were evaluated on an Accuray Radixact unit equipped with helical fan beam kVCT to assess the capabilities of this newly available modality. kVCT IQMs were evaluated and compared to a kVCT simulator and linear accelerator-based cone beam CTs (CBCT) using a commercial CBCT image quality phantom. kVCTs were acquired on the Accuray Radixact for all combinations of kVp and mAs in fine mode using a 440-mm field of view (FOV). Evaluated IQMs were spatial resolution, overall uniformity, subject contrast, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and effective slice thickness. Imaging dose was assessed for planar kV imaging.

resultsOn this kVCT system spatial resolution and contrast were consistent across all settings with 0.28 ± 0.03 lp/mm and 9.8% ± 0.7% (both 95% confidence interval). CNR strongly depended on selected mode (views per rotation) and body size (mA per view) and ranged between 7.9 and 34.9. Overall uniformity was greater than 97% for all settings. Large FOV was not found to substantially affect the IQMs whereas small FOV affected IQMs due to its effect on pitch. Technique-matched CT simulator scans were comparable for uniformity and contrast, while spatial resolution was higher (0.43 ± 0.06 lp/mm), and CNR was between 4% (140 kVp) and 51% (100 kVp) lower. For kV-CBCT, spatial resolutions ranging from 0.37 to 0.44 lp/mm were achieved with comparable contrast, CNR, and uniformity to kVCT. All kVCT scans exhibit imaging artifacts due to helical acquisition. Clinical acquisitions of megavoltage (MV) CT, kV-CBCT, and kVCT on the same patient showed improved and comparable image quality of kVCT compared to MVCT and kV-CBCT, respectively.

conclusionsHelical fan beam kVCT allows for daily image guidance for localization and setup verification with comparable performance to existing kV-CBCT systems. Scan parameters must be selected carefully to maximize image quality for the desired tasks. Due to the large effective slice thicknesses for all parameter combinations, kVCT scans should not be used for simulation or planning of stereotactic procedures. Finally, improved image quality over MVCT has the potential to greatly improve manual and automated adaptive monitoring and planning.

Identifiers

PMID35036634
PMCPMC8749200
OpenAlexW3217115431

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.