ArticleJournal of radiation research2024
A potential usefulness of ultra-high-resolution computed tomography in quality assurance of remote after-loading system for cervical cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intracavitary brachytherapy with a remote after-loading system (RALS) is performed as a part of radical radiation therapy in cervical cancer. The radiation source is delivered directly through an applicator placed inside the uterus or vagina. Thorough quality control is important to prevent accidents that can lead to serious irradiation error, and an applicator check is one such quality control measure. We experienced a clinical situation in which a small volume of water was observed in the lumen of a post-sterilized applicator on treatment-planning CT. Although the submersion test was negative and no air bubbles emerged from the applicator, ultra-high-resolution computed tomography (U-HRCT) showed a linear crack reaching the inside of the applicator. This abnormality was not identified on treatment-planning CT, which has lower spatial resolution than U-HRCT. In addition, no linear cracks were seen on U-HRCT images of eight other applicators considered to be free from damage. U-HRCT may have superior potential to detect applicator damage and could be useful for quality assurance of the RALS procedure.
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.