ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2024
An evaluation of ankle and foot bolus in paediatric modulated arc total body irradiation (MATBI).
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis retrospective planning study aimed to evaluate the role of bolus in achieving dose uniformity in the ankles and feet in paediatric patients undergoing Modulated Arc Total Body Irradiation (MATBI) treatment and to identify patient factors that may negate or warrant its use.
methodsThe clinically treated plans of 20 paediatric patients who received MATBI treatment utilising ankle and foot bolus (Bolus plan) were compared with two retrospectively generated plans; a plan with bolus removed and no re-optimisation (No Bolus plan), and a re-optimised plan without bolus attempting to achieve equal dosimetry to the clinical plan via monitor unit adjustment (MU plan). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the dose uniformity criteria of ±10% coverage of the reference dose (RD) for each subregion of the ankle and foot for the three plans. The impact of patient height, weight, and age at the time of treatment was evaluated using Spearman's correlation.
resultsVariation in doses >10% RD was minimal across the three plans, with an average D1cc difference < 0.4Gy. For the ankle and foot regions in the Bolus plans, the volume receiving at least 90% of the RD (V90) was on average > 92%. In No Bolus and MU plans, there was an average reduction of 24.5% and 23.2% V90 coverage respectively in the toes. Spearman's correlation suggests height has the strongest relationship to D1cc.
conclusionThis study validated the continued use of ankle and foot bolus to achieve dosimetric goals for paediatric MATBI treatments, particularly V90 coverage across all heights.
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.