ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2022
Precision of image-guided spinal stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and impact of positioning variables.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective intrafraction motion verification using triggered kilovoltage images during bone metastases stereotactic body radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Robustness assessment of radiotherapy treatment plans in Switzerland.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Article
- Margins of Planning Target Volume and Set-up Errors based on Megavoltage Cone-Beam CT Image Guided Radiotherapy with Helical Tomotherapy: Importance of Automatic Registration Plus Manual Registration.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2026Article
- New findings on clinical experience on surface-guided radiotherapy for frameless non-coplanar stereotactic radiosurgery treatments.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Robustness analysis of dynamic trajectory radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy plans for head and neck cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of computed tomography artefacts of carbon-fiber and titanium implants in patients with spinal oligometastatic disease undergoing stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Practice and principles of stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine and non-spine bone metastases.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Setup and intra-fractional motion measurements using surface scanning in head and neck cancer radiotherapy- A feasibility study.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Generating missing patient anatomy from partially acquired cone-beam computed tomography images using deep learning: a proof of concept.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Spinal stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) requires high precision. We evaluate the intrafraction motion during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided SABR with different immobilization techniques. Material and methods: Fifty-seven consecutive patients were treated for 62 spinal lesions with SABR with positioning corrected in six degrees of freedom. A surface monitoring system was used for patient set up and to ensure patient immobilization in 65% of patients. Intrafractional motion was defined as the difference between the last CBCT before the start of treatment and the first CT afterwards. Results: For all 194 fractions, the mean intrafractional motion was 0.1 cm (0-1.1 cm) in vertical direction, 0.1 cm (0-1.1 cm) in longitudinal direction and 0.1 cm (0-0.5 cm) in lateral direction. A mean pitch of 0.6° (0-4.3°), a roll of 0.5° (0-3.4°) and a rotational motion of 0.4° (0-3.9°) was observed. 95.5% of the translational errors and 95.4% of the rotational errors were within safety range. There was a significantly higher rotational motion for patients with arms along the body (p = 0.01) and without the use of the body mask (p = 0.05). For cervical locations a higher rotational motion was seen, although not significant (p = 0.1). The acquisition of an extra CBCT was correlated with a higher rotational (pitch) motion (p = 0 < 0.01). Conclusion: Very high precision in CBCT guided and surface-guided spinal SABR was observed in this cohort. The lowest intrafraction motion was seen in patients treated with arms above their head and a body mask. The use of IGRT with surface monitoring is an added value for patient monitoring leading to treatment interruption if necessary.
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.