ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Three-dimensional surface scanning of patients to extend computed tomography field of view and scan length for dose calculation and collision avoidance in radiotherapy treatment planning.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 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.
- Three-dimensional surface scanning of patients to extend computed tomography field of view and scan length for dose calculation and collision avoidance in radiotherapy treatment planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRadiotherapy treatment planning requires knowledge of a patient's anatomical surface for use in dose calculations, collision checks, or surface-guided radiation therapy (SGRT). This information is usually obtained from a computed tomography (CT) scan which may encounter field-of-view (FOV) limitations or require additional radiation dose beyond the treatment area to capture the full patient habitus. PURPOSE: This study demonstrates an affordable alternative solution to obtain a patient's surface information without CT or room mounted surface-guidance imaging cameras for the purpose of detecting patient collisions and providing additional skin surface information needed for appropriate depth calculations of clipped FOV scans.
methodsThree-dimensional (3D) surface models of five patients were acquired immediately prior to CT simulation using an iPad Air 2 equipped with a Structure Sensor Pro and Monocle SS application. The 3D surfaces were manually registered to the CT images and nearest distances between CT surface and 3D surface were calculated. Nearest distance calculations were also performed with a 2 mm CT rind structure that excluded select regions not relevant to surface detection. To demonstrate the advantage of having additional scan length for clearance checks, a collision simulated plan was evaluated with a shortened CT scan length versus with additional 3D surface information.
resultsCT rind to 3D scan surface mean distances for each patient were 1.65 mm, 0.99 mm, -0.93 mm, -0.79 mm, and -1.53 mm with standard deviations of 6.51 mm, 6.71 mm, 3.38 mm, 2.84 mm, and 2.69 mm.
conclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility of an accessible low-cost 3D surface scanning solution to supplement clipped field-of-view CT scans and reduce CT scan lengths by obtaining important patient surface data for improved calculation accuracy, treatment clearance checks, and SGRT.
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.