ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024
A prospective randomized study comparing two frameless immobilization systems for cranial stereotactic radiotherapy.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Dual Shell Encompass Fibreplast™ System (DS-Encompass) by CQ Medical™ is validated for frameless immobilization in stereotactic brain radiotherapy. An alternative mask model has been proposed with the rear shell replaced by a Moldcare® cushion (M-Encompass). To validate the use of this model in our cranial stereotactic workflow method including HyperArc™, we performed a prospective randomized study comparing inter-and intrafractional motion and patients comfort between both masks. Materials & Methods: A prospective randomized study between DS-Encompass and M-Encompass was conducted involving 60 participants. Stratification between DS-Encompass and M-Encompass was carried out based on the fractionation scheme. Treatment plans were created with HyperArc™. During treatment, surface guidance was used for patient positioning and monitoring. A pre-treatment cone-beam CT (CBCT) was acquired to correct interfractional motion and a post-treatment CBCT was acquired to quantify the intrafractional motion. Patients reported comfort was analyzed with a Likert-scale at the end of the treatment. Unpaired t-tests were conducted to determine the level of significance. Results: No significant difference in interfractional translations is present. A significant difference is revealed in roll-axis rotation, where DS-Encompass allows for smaller deviations. Since interfractional motion can be corrected through daily CBCT-scans and 6D-couch corrections, they are clinically irrelevant. Intrafractional motion does not differ significantly and remains below 0.5 mm and 0.5° for both systems. There is no statistical difference in patient-reported comfort. Conclusion: We conclude that Encompass with Moldcare offers a safe alternative to Duall Shell Encompass for non-coplanar stereotactic brain radiotherapy. There is no significant difference in intrafractional motion nor difference in comfort levels.
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.