ArticleScientific reports2025
Quantification of head leakage radiation in CyberKnife robotic radiosurgery systems using a multimodal approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- In silico assessment of out-of-field dose in multiple brain metastases stereotactic radiosurgery.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Site-specific performance and complexity-dependent risk assessment of patient-specific quality assurance using a 2D array detector in CyberKnife radiosurgery.Radiological physics and technology · 2026Article
- A glimpse into the CyberKnife robotic radiosurgery system: technical specifications and developments during thirty years.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to measure the head leakage radiation of a CyberKnife system (Model-S7 (without MLC)) in-patient and out-of-patient planes using optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs), vented ionization chambers, and a pressurized ionization chamber-based survey meter, and to compare the measured leakage levels with the limits specified by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standards. In this study, a CyberKnife LINAC equipped with a 6 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) beam and a maximum circular field size of 6 cm in diameter was utilized. Leakage radiation was assessed for both IRIS and FIXED collimators in their fully closed positions. Three independent measurement techniques were employed to quantify leakage: optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs), vented ionization chambers (ICs), and a pressurized ionization chamber-based survey meter (SM). Leakage measurement points were taken as per the IEC 60601-2-1 report both for in-patient plane and out-of-patient plane. The total number of monitor units (MU) delivered were 500 MU's. The measured average in-patient plane leakage was 0.015% using IC, 0.100% using OSLD and 0.010% using SM, that is well within the tolerance limit of 0.1% according to IEC guidelines. The average leakage for out of patient plane was 0.037%, which is well within the limit of 0.5% as per IEC guidelines. The study measured head leakage radiation of the CyberKnife System using OSLD, ionization chambers, and a survey meter. Leakage levels for both in-patient and out-of-patient planes were significantly below the IEC 60601-2-1 standard limits. This confirms the system's compliance with safety guidelines, ensuring minimal radiation exposure.
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.