ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2023
Evaluation of computed tomography metal artifact and CyberKnife fiducial recognition for novel size fiducial markers.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety and Efficacy of Histotripsy Treatments Near Implanted Metallic Fiducials and Endovascular Coils in Phantoms and in an In Vivo Swine Model.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of computed tomography metal artifact and CyberKnife fiducial recognition for novel size fiducial markers.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare fiducial markers used in CyberKnife treatment in terms of metal artifact intensity observed in CT images and fiducial recognition in the CyberKnife system affected by patient body thickness and type of marker.
methodsFive markers, ACCULOC 0.9 mm × 3 mm, Ball type Gold Anchor (GA) 0.28 mm × 10 mm, 0.28 mm × 20 mm, and novel size GA 0.4 mm × 10 mm, 0.4 mm × 20 mm were evaluated. To evaluate metal artifacts of CT images, two types of CT images of water-equivalent gels with each marker were acquired using Aquilion LB CT scanner, one applied SEMAR (SEMAR-on) and the other did not apply this technique (SEMAR-off). The evaluation metric of artifact intensity (M
resultsThe mean M
conclusionsWe demonstrated the potential to reduce metal artifacts in the CT image to the same level for all the markers we evaluated by applying SEMAR. Additionally, the fiducial recognition of each marker may vary depending on the thickness of the patient's body. Particularly, we showed that GA 0.40 × 20 mm may have more optimal recognition for CyberKnife treatment in cases of high bodily thickness in comparison to the other markers.
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.