ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Evaluation of a novel patient-specific quality assurance phantom for robotic single-isocentre, multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactic radiotherapy.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robot-assisted technique versus freehand technique for spine surgery: an umbrella review.Annals of medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of a novel patient-specific quality assurance phantom for robotic single-isocentre, multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactic radiotherapy.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) of 3 targets in a single delivery using a novel film-based phantom.
methodsThe phantom was designed to rotate freely as a sphere and could measure 3 targets with film in a single delivery. After identifying the coordinates of 3 targets in the skull, the rotation angles about the equator and meridian were computed for optimal phantom setup, ensuring the film plane intersected the 3 targets. The plans were delivered on the CyberKnife system using fiducial tracking. The irradiated films were scanned and processed. All films were analysed using 3 gamma criteria.
resultsFifteen CyberKnife test plans with 3 different modalities were delivered on the phantom. Both automatic and marker-based registration methods were applied when registering the irradiated film and dose plane. Gamma analysis was performed using a 3%/1 mm, 2%/1 mm, and 1%/1 mm criteria with a 10% threshold. For the automatic registration method, the passing rates were 98.2% ± 1.9%, 94.2% ± 3.7%, and 80.9% ± 6.3%, respectively. For the marker-based registration approach, the passing rates were 96.4% ± 2.7%, 91.7% ± 4.3%, and 78.4% ± 6.2%, respectively.
conclusionsA novel spherical phantom was evaluated for the CyberKnife system and achieved acceptable PSQA passing rates using TG218 recommendations. The phantom can measure true-composite dose and offers high-resolution results for PSQA, making it a valuable device for robotic radiosurgery. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first study on PSQA of 3 targets concurrently on the CyberKnife system.
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.