ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2022
Detection of setup errors with a body-surface laser-scanning system for whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robustness of Breast Margins with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy without a Six-Degrees-of-Freedom Couch: A Dosimetric Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Detection of setup errors with a body-surface laser-scanning system for whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe compared the setup errors determined by an optical imaging system (OSIS) in women who received breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by whole-breast radiotherapy (WBRT) with those from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) carried out routinely.
methodsWe compared 130 setup errors in 10 patients undergoing WBRT following BCS by analyzing the translational and rotational couch shifts via CBCT and OSIS. Patients were treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). The patient outline extracted from the planning reference Computed tomography (CT) was used as the reference for OSIS and CBCT alignment during treatment. We detected the setup uncertainty using CBCT and OSIS at the first five fractionations of RT and then twice a week.
resultsThe absolute translational setup error (mean ± Standard deviation (SD)) in x (lateral), y (longitudinal), and z (vertical) axes detected by the OSIS was 0.14 ± 0.18, 0.15 ± 0.14, and 0.13 ± 0.13 cm, respectively. The rotational setup error (mean ± SD) in Rx (pitch), Ry (roll), and Rz (yaw) axes was 0.77 ± 0.54, 0.76 ± 0.61, and 1.23 ± 0.95, respectively. Significant difference is observed only in one direction (Rx, p = 0.03) in the paired setup errors obtaining from OSIS and CBCT, without significant differences in five directions.
conclusionOSIS is a repeatable and reliable system that can be used to detect misalignments with accuracy, which is capable of supplementing CBCT for WBRT after BCS. We believe that an OSIS may be easier to use, quicker, and reduce overall dose as this method of patient alignment does not require ionizing radiation.
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.