ArticleJournal of radiation research2023
Evaluations of patient-specific bolus fabricated by mold-and-cast method using computer numerical control machine tools†.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The patient-specific bolus fabricated by a mold-and-cast method using a 3D printer (3DP) and silicon rubber has been adopted in clinical practices. Manufacturing a mold using 3DP, however, can cause time delays due to failures during the 3D printing process. Thereby, we investigated an alternative method of the mold fabrication using computer numerical control (CNC) machine tools. Treatment plans were conducted concerning a keloid scar formed on the ear and nose. The bolus structures were determined in a treatment planning system (TPS), and the molds were fabricated using the same structure file but with 3DP and CNC independently. Boluses were then manufactured using each mold with silicone rubbers. We compared the geometrical difference between the boluses and the planned structure using computed tomography (CT) images of the boluses. In addition, dosimetric differences between the two measurements using each bolus and the differences between the measured and calculated dose from TPS were evaluated using an anthropomorphic head phantom. Geometrically, the CT images of the boluses fabricated by the 3DP mold and the CNC mold showed differences compared to the planned structure within 2.6 mm of Hausdorff distance. The relative dose difference between the measurements using either bolus was within 2.3%. In conclusion, the bolus made by the CNC mold benefits from a stable fabricating process, retaining the performance of the bolus made by the 3DP mold.
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.