ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024
Optimized raw data selection for artifact reduction of breathing controlled four-dimensional sequence scanning.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative evaluation of 4DCT and 4DCBCT for motion and volume measurement accuracy in a dynamic phantom.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Development of a novel 3D-printed dynamic anthropomorphic thorax phantom for evaluation of four-dimensional computed tomography.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Even with most breathing-controlled four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) algorithms image artifacts caused by single significant longer breathing still occur, resulting in negative consequences for radiotherapy. Our study presents first phantom examinations of a new optimized raw data selection and binning algorithm, aiming to improve image quality and geometric accuracy without additional dose exposure. Materials and methods: To validate the new approach, phantom measurements were performed to assess geometric accuracy (volume fidelity, root mean square error, Dice coefficient of volume overlap) for one- and three-dimensional tumor motion trajectories with and without considering motion hysteresis effects. Scans without significantly longer breathing cycles served as references. Results: Median volume deviations between optimized approach and reference of at maximum 1% were obtained considering all movements. In comparison, standard reconstruction yielded median deviations of 9%, 21% and 12% for one-dimensional, three-dimensional, and hysteresis motion, respectively. Measurements in one- and three-dimensional directions reached a median Dice coefficient of 0.970 ± 0.013 and 0.975 ± 0.012, respectively, but only 0.918 ± 0.075 for hysteresis motions averaged over all measurements for the optimized selection. However, for the standard reconstruction median Dice coefficients were 0.845 ± 0.200, 0.868 ± 0.205 and 0.915 ± 0.075 for one- and three-dimensional as well as hysteresis motions, respectively. Median root mean square errors for the optimized algorithm were 30 ± 16 HU Conclusions: The algorithm was proven to reduce 4DCT-related artifacts due to missing projection data without further dose exposure. An improvement in radiotherapy treatment planning due to better image quality can be expected.
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.