ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Comparative evaluation of volume and helical four-dimensional computed tomography using canon system.
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.
- Comparative evaluation of volume and helical four-dimensional computed tomography using canon system.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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFour-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) is an advanced imaging technique designed to capture anatomical motion over time, enabling more accurate evaluation of tumor and organ motion owing to respiration, while minimizing motion-related artifacts. 4DCT employs two primary scanning modes-volume (cine) mode and helical mode-each with distinct clinical implications. A comprehensive evaluation of both approaches is therefore essential prior to clinical implementation. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare volume and helical 4DCT scan modes in terms of image quality, dimensional accuracy, and positional accuracy for respiratory-gated radiotherapy.
methods4DCT imaging was conducted using a Canon Aquilion ONE Prism CT scanner integrated with an Anzai respiratory gating system. The two scan modes were assessed under identical imaging parameters, with differences arising only from their respective acquisition protocols. Phantom experiments were conducted using a motion phantom to simulate normal, rapid, and irregular respiratory patterns. Image quality, dimensional accuracy, and positional accuracy were quantitatively evaluated. Additionally, a retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical 4DCT datasets (n = 10), including lung, liver, and pancreatic cancers.
resultsVolume mode demonstrated superior dose efficiency and dimensional consistency, preserving stable object volumes across respiratory phases, particularly under rapid motion conditions. Helical mode achieved higher positional accuracy and improved temporal resolution for motion tracking, but with a greater imaging dose. These findings were consistent with the clinical datasets, wherein volume mode reduced dimensional errors and helical mode provided more accurate motion representation.
conclusionsBoth volume and helical 4DCT modes offer distinct advantages depending on clinical objectives. Volume mode is better suited for applications requiring high spatial accuracy and reduced radiation exposure, while helical mode is preferable for precise tracking of respiratory motion owing to its superior temporal resolution. Careful selection of the scan mode and system settings is essential for optimizing respiratory-gated radiotherapy planning.
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.