Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37950307›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2023

Noninvasive cardiac radioablation for ventricular tachycardia: dosimetric comparison between linear accelerator- and robotic CyberKnife-based radiosurgery systems.

Ching-Yu Wang, Li-Ting Ho, Lian-Yu Lin, Hsing-Min Chan, Hung-Yi Chen, Tung-Lin Yu, Yu-Sen Huang, Sung-Hsin Kuo, Wen-Jeng Lee, Jenny Ling-Yu Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ching-Yu WangDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Li-Ting HoDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Lian-Yu LinDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hsing-Min ChanDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hung-Yi ChenDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tung-Lin YuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Fu-Jen Catholic University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yu-Sen HuangDepartment of Medical Imaging, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7, Chung-Shan S. Rd., Taipei, 100, Taiwan.
Sung-Hsin KuoDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wen-Jeng LeeDepartment of Medical Imaging, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7, Chung-Shan S. Rd., Taipei, 100, Taiwan. wenjeng@gmail.com.
Jenny Ling-Yu ChenDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. lychen@ntu.edu.tw.
National Taiwan University Hospital · TWFu Jen Catholic University · TWNational Taipei University of Business · TWNational Taiwan University · TWNational Taiwan University of Science and Technology · TW

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 110-2314-B-002-138-MY3National Taiwan University Hospital 111-S0025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew dosimetric comparisons have been published between linear accelerator (LA)-based systems and CyberKnife (CK)-based robotic radiosurgery systems for cardiac radio-ablation in ventricular tachycardia. This study aimed to compare the dosimetry of noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation deliverable on LA with that on CK.

methodsThirteen patients who underwent noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation by LA were included. The prescribed dose was 25 Gy in 1 fraction, and the average planning target volume was 49.8 ± 31.0 cm

resultsBoth the CK and LA plans accomplished appropriate dose coverage and normal tissue sparing. Compared with the LA plans, the CK plans achieved significantly lower gradient indices (3.12 ± 0.71 vs. 3.48 ± 0.55, p = 0.031) and gradient measures (1.00 ± 0.29 cm vs. 1.17 ± 0.29 cm, p < 0.001). They had similar equivalent conformity indices (CK vs. LA: 0.84 ± 0.08 vs. 0.87 ± 0.07, p = 0.093) and maximum doses 2 cm from the planning target volume (PTV) in any direction (CK vs. LA: 50.8 ± 9.9% vs. 53.1 ± 5.3%, p = 0.423). The dosimetric advantages of CK were more prominent in patients with a PTV of ≤ 50 cm

conclusionsBoth CK and LA are ideal modalities for noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation. Upfront treatment should be considered based on clinical intent.

Indexed as

RadiosurgeryRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRobotic Surgical ProceduresTachycardia, VentricularHumansParticle AcceleratorsRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedCardiac radioablationCyberKnifeLinear acceleratorVentricular tachycardia

Identifiers

PMID37950307
PMCPMC10638803
OpenAlexW4388567247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.