ArticleScientific reports2025
Effect of hydrogel rectal spacer on seminal vesicle inter-fraction motion during prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed to assess the effect of a rectal spacer on the inter-fraction motion of the seminal vesicles (SV) during prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Clinical data from 60 consecutive patients (300 fractions) with localized prostate cancer treated with definitive SBRT alone (five fractions), between June 2022 and January 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Of the 60 patients, 44 had a spacer implanted. The residual displacement of SVs in the cone-beam CT relative to those in the planning CT was compared between with and without spacer. The maximum displacement of the proximal SV in 90% of the patients was also evaluated. Additionally, the relationship between the gel/prostate volume ratio and SV displacement was analyzed. The gel/prostate volume ratio was 30 ± 15%. Proximal SV displacement significantly differed with and without the spacer (2.0 vs. 3.8 mm, P < 0.001). Maximum proximal SV displacement also significantly differed with and without the spacer (3.0 vs. 5.1 mm, P < 0.001). In 90% of patients with the spacer, the maximum proximal SV displacement was within 4 mm. SV displacement did not change according to gel/prostate volume ratio. The spacer can limit inter-fraction motion of SVs. The gel/prostate volume ratio was not clinically significant.
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.