Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36819474›Full record

ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2022

Comparison of vaginal gauze packing technique with or without balloon in high-dose-rate brachytherapy of uterine cervical cancer: A crossover randomized controlled trial.

Rishanthini Dhanapalan, Jagadesan Pandjatcharam, K Saravanan, Ninad Harish Patil

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Role of rectal spacers in gynecological cancer radiotherapy: reducing rectal dose and treatment-related toxicity.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rishanthini DhanapalanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India.
Jagadesan PandjatcharamDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India.
K SaravananMedical Physics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India.
Ninad Harish PatilDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education & Research, Puducherry, India.
Jawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the rectal and bladder doses using two different vaginal packing techniques among uterine cervical cancer patients receiving high-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT). Material and methods: Forty-five patients with cervical cancer were randomized to receive two sessions of ICBT using tandem and ring applicator (Varian Results: The mean age of patients was 51 years. Majority (88%) of patients had locally advanced stages of cancer at baseline (stage IIB or more). Rectal doses were significantly less in combined packing technique (D Conclusions: Combined vaginal packing resulted in statistically significant reduction in rectal radiation dose compared with standard vaginal gauze packing in high-dose-rate brachytherapy of cervix cancer using tandem and ring applicators.

Indexed as

brachytherapycervical cancerhigh-dose-rate brachytherapyintra-vaginal balloonrectal dosimetrytandem and ring applicatorvaginal packing

Identifiers

PMID36819474
PMCPMC9924150
OpenAlexW4316652123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.