ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2022
Intra-fractional motion error during HyperArc stereotactic radiosurgery on patients with brain metastases: Comparison of open and full-face clamshell-style immobilization devices.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of dosimetric impact and plan robustness of MLC motion and setup errors in SRS for multiple brain metastases.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Article
- Accuracy and workflow efficiency of surface-guided open-face vs. closed-face masks in SRT/SRS for brain metastases.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Improvement in positional accuracy with integrated surface- and X-ray imaging for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery patients.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A knowledge-based planning model to identify fraction-reduction opportunities in brain stereotactic radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Dosimetric evaluation of a novel automated noncoplanar volumetric modulated arc therapy technique for treating optic nerve sheath meningiomas.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Dosimetric comparison of HyperArc and InCise MLC-based CyberKnife plans in treating single and multiple brain metastases.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- A prospective randomized study comparing two frameless immobilization systems for cranial stereotactic radiotherapy.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Impact of magnetic resonance imaging-related geometric distortion of dose distribution in fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with brain metastases.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2024Article
- Dosimetric effects of rotational errors for single isocenter multiple targets in HyperArc plans: A phantom and retrospective imaging analysis study.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Geometric and dosimetric consequences of intra-fractional movement in single isocenter non-coplanar stereotactic radiosurgery.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Intra-fractional motion error during HyperArc stereotactic radiosurgery on patients with brain metastases: Comparison of open and full-face clamshell-style immobilization devices.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Evaluation of intrafraction motion with an open immobilization mask for HyperArc treatment of multiple brain metastases.Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the intrafractional motion error (IME) during stereotactic irradiation (STI) in patients with brain metastases immobilized using open- (Encompass) and full-face (DSPS) clamshell-style immobilization devices.
methodsEncompass (38 patients) and DSPS (38 patients) were used for patient immobilization, and HyperArc plans with three to four non-coplanar beams were generated to deliver 25 to 35 Gy in three to five fractions. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed on patients before and after the treatment. Moreover, the difference in patient position between the two CBCT images was considered as the IME. The margins to compensate for IME were calculated using the van Herk margin formula.
resultsFor Encompass, the mean values of IME in the translational setup were 0.1, 0.2, and 0.0 mm in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior, and left-right directions, respectively, and the mean values of IME about rotational axes were -0.1, 0.0, and 0.0° for the Pitch, Roll, and Yaw rotations, respectively. For DSPS, the mean values of IME in the translational setup were 0.2, 0.2, and 0.0 mm in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior, and left-right directions, respectively, and the mean values of IME about rotational axes were -0.1, -0.1, and 0.0° for the Pitch, Roll, and Yaw rotations, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed between the IME of the two immobilization systems except in the anterior-posterior direction (p = 0.02). Moreover, no statistically significant correlation was observed between three-dimensional IME and treatment time. The margin compensation for IME was less than 1 mm for both immobilization devices.
conclusionsThe IME during STI using open- and full-face clamshell-style immobilization devices is approximately equal considering the adequate accuracy in patient positioning.
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.