ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2025
A novel respiratory surrogate system with table motion correction and visual feedback for computed tomography.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 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
Background and purpose: Managing respiratory motion is crucial for computed tomography (CT) in radiotherapy. Clinical surrogate systems and visual coaching can exhibit inaccuracies due to table motion or sag, limiting effectiveness in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) CT and four-dimensional CT (4DCT). This study evaluated a motion-corrected novel surrogate and feedback system to improve DIBH and 4DCT breathing quality. Materials and methods: The feedback system was evaluated in phantom tests for table sag compensation under incremental loads (up to 104 kg). For patients, DIBH plateau stability metrics (n = 2) and baseline shifts in 4DCT (n = 3) were assessed. In a volunteer study (n = 10), audio and visual feedback were compared in DIBH and 4DCT scenarios, assessing breath-hold stability and breathing regularity, respectively. Results: In phantom measurements, the impact of table sag on the breathing signal was effectively reduced at maximum load, with baseline shifts limited to -0.2 mm, compared to up to -5 mm in clinical systems. In patients, the system improved DIBH signal stability, as reflected in the plateau drift (-0.2 mm/s vs. -0.8 mm/s), and substantially reduced baseline shifts in 4DCT (-0.2 ± 0.2 mm) when compared to clinical systems (-1.7 ± 0.3 mm). Volunteer tests demonstrated improved DIBH reproducibility with visual feedback (standard deviation: 0.5 mm vs. 1.1 mm with audio feedback). In 4DCT scenarios, visual feedback unified irregular breathers but offered no consistent improvement over audio guidance. Conclusion: The novel system compensated for table motion in phantom, patient, and volunteer measurements. In feedback scenarios, it performed well in DIBH, while its performance in 4DCT requires further optimization.
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.