ArticleCureus2022
The Impact of Parameter Selection and Setup Conditions on Image Quality of an On-Board Helical Kilovoltage Computed Tomography System.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of kVCT- and MVCT-guided helical tomotherapy for total body irradiation: evaluation of process times and residual setup errors.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the imaging performance of an on-board helical kilovoltage computed tomography (kVCT) system mounted on a helical tomotherapy unit for various imaging parameters and setup conditions. Methods Images of a commonly used computed tomography (CT) image quality phantom were acquired while varying the selection of available parameters (anatomy, mode, body size) as well as phantom positioning and size. Image quality metrics (IQM) including noise, uniformity, contrast, CT number constancy, and spatial resolution were compared for parameter and setup variations. Results The use of fine mode improved noise and contrast metrics by 20-30% compared to normal mode and by nearly a factor of two compared to the coarse mode for otherwise identical protocols. Uniformity, CT number constancy, and spatial resolution were also improved for fine mode. Thorax and pelvis anatomy protocols improved noise, uniformity, and contrast metrics by 10-20% compared to images acquired with head protocols. No significant differences in CT number constancy or spatial resolution were observed regardless of anatomy choice. Increasing body size (milliampere second (mAs)/rotation) improved each image quality metric. Vertical and lateral phantom shifts of up to ±6 cm degraded noise and contrast metrics by up to 30% relative to the isocenter while also worsening uniformity and CT number constancy. IQM were also degraded substantially with the use of annuli to increase the phantom diameter (32 cm vs. 20 cm). Despite variations in image characteristics among the investigated changes, most metrics were within manufacturer specifications when applicable. Conclusion This work demonstrates the dependence of image quality on parameter selection and setup conditions for a helical kVCT system utilized in image-guided and adaptive helical tomotherapy treatments. While the overall image quality is robust to variations in imaging parameters, care should be taken when selecting parameters as patient size increases or positioning moves from the isocenter to ensure adequate image quality is still achieved.
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.