Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38818304›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2024

Dynamic anthropomorphic thorax phantom for quality assurance of motion management in radiotherapy.

Sara Abdollahi, Ali Asghar Mowlavi, Mohammad Hadi Hadizadeh Yazdi, Sofie Ceberg, Marianne Camille Aznar, Fatemeh Varshoee Tabrizi, Roham Salek, Matthias Guckenberger, Stephanie Tanadini-Lang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sara AbdollahiDepartment of Physics, Faculty of Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
Ali Asghar MowlaviDepartment of Physics, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran.
Mohammad Hadi Hadizadeh YazdiDepartment of Physics, Faculty of Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
Sofie CebergDepartment of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Marianne Camille AznarDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Fatemeh Varshoee TabriziDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Reza Radiotherapy and Oncology Center, Mashhad, Iran.
Roham SalekDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.
Matthias GuckenbergerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
Stephanie Tanadini-LangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and purpose: Motion management techniques are important to spare the healthy tissue adequately. However, they are complex and need dedicated quality assurance. The aim of this study was to create a dynamic phantom designed for quality assurance and to replicate a patient's size, anatomy, and tissue density. Materials and methods: A computed tomography (CT) scan of a cancer patient was used to create molds for the lungs, heart, ribs, and vertebral column via additive manufacturing. A pump system and software were developed to simulate respiratory dynamics. The extent of respiratory motion was quantified using a 4DCT scan. End-to-end tests were conducted to evaluate two motion management techniques for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Results: The chest wall moved between 4 mm and 13 mm anteriorly and 2 mm to 7 mm laterally during the breathing. The diaphragm exhibited superior-inferior movement ranging from 5 mm to 16 mm in the left lung and 10 mm to 36 mm in the right lung. The left lung tumor displaced ± 7 mm superior-inferiorly and anterior-posteriorly. The CT numbers were for lung: -716 ± 108 HU (phantom) and -713 ± 70 HU (patient); bone: 460 ± 20 HU (phantom) and 458 ± 206 HU (patient); soft tissue: 92 ± 9 HU (phantom) and 60 ± 25 HU (patient). The end-to-end testing showed an excellent agreement between the measured and the calculated dose for ion chamber and film dosimetry. Conclusions: The phantom is recommended for quality assurance, evaluating the institution's specific planning and motion management strategies either through end-to-end testing or as an external audit phantom.

Indexed as

Dynamic anthropomorphic phantomEnd-to-end testLung SBRT

Identifiers

PMID38818304
PMCPMC11137593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.