ArticleJournal of radiation research2025
Comparison of rectal and bladder dose between retractor insertion and gauze packing in intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of rectal retractor use on dosimetric parameters, treatment-related adverse events, and clinical outcomes of cervical cancer brachytherapy: A retrospective tertiary-centre study.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2027Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare and verify the rectal and bladder doses of intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) using both rectal retractor (RR) and gauze packing (GP) in the same patients. A total of 37 patients who underwent ICBT using RR and GP for cervical cancer were included in this study. Rectal and bladder dose and volume data were compared with the RR and GP treatments in the same patients and the confounding factors were examined. When comparing RR and GP, the median and interquartile ranges for rectal D2cc were 2.8 (2.5-3.7) Gy with RR and 3.2 (2.7-3.8) Gy with GP. The median bladder D2cc was 4.9 (4.5-6.3) Gy with RR and 4.8 (3.9-5.4) Gy with GP. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed that rectal doses were significantly lower with RR (P = 0.02), whereas bladder doses were significantly higher with RR (P < 0.001). Analysis of the correlation between the number of gauze pieces and the difference in rectal D2cc between GP and RR using Pearson's distribution revealed no significant correlation (R = -0.20, P = 0.22), as well as bladder D2cc between GP and RR also revealed no significant correlation (R = -0.20, P = 0.22). The number of gauze pieces did not necessarily correlate with a reduction in the rectal and bladder dose. In conclusion, rectal D2cc was lower with RR in image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer, whereas bladder D2cc was higher with RR than with GP.
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.