ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2024
Development of a 3D printed phantom for commissioning and quality assurance of multiple brain targets stereotactic radiosurgery.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2024. 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.
- Evaluation of interfractional shift corrections in Gamma Knife radiosurgery.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Increasing demands on commissioning and quality assurance for cone-based multiple brain metastases robotic radiosurgery: evaluation in a custom phantom.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Feasibility study of a multi-lesion cyberknife radiotherapy plan verification method using a 2D array with pre-set roll angles.Precision radiation oncology · 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
Single plan techniques for multiple brain targets (MBT) stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are now routine. Patient specific quality assurance (QA) for MBT poses challenges due to the limited capabilities of existing QA tools which necessitates several plan redeliveries. This study sought to develop an SRS QA phantom that enables flexible MBT patient specific QA in a single delivery, along with complex SRS commissioning. PLA marble and PLA StoneFil materials were selected based on the literature and previous research conducted in our department. The HU numbers were investigated to determine the appropriate percentage infill for skull and soft-tissue equivalence. A Prusa MK3S printer in conjunction with the above-mentioned filaments were used to print the SRS QA phantom. Quality control (QC) was performed on the printed skull, film inserts and plugs for point dose measurements. EBT3 film and point dose measurements were performed using a CC04 ionisation chamber. QC demonstrated that the SRS QA phantom transverse, coronal and sagittal film planes were orthogonal within 0.5°. HU numbers for the skull, film inserts and plugs were 858 ± 20 and 35 ± 12 respectively. Point and EBT3 film dose measurements were within 2.5% and 3%/2 mm 95% gamma pass rate, respectively except one Gross Tumour Volume (GTV) that had a slightly lower gamma pass rate. Dose distributions to five GTVs were measured with EBT3 film in a single plan delivery on CyberKnife. In conclusion, an SRS QA phantom was designed, and 3D printed and its use for performing complex MBT patient specific QA in a single delivery was demonstrated.
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.