ArticleJournal of radiosurgery and SBRT2025
Optimizing Gamma Knife radiosurgery: Analysis of gains achieved through upgradation of technology.
Article in Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) using the 4C system faces challenges with treatment cancellations due to clearance issues, frame complications, and limited treatment space. Understanding cancellation factors is crucial for optimizing patient selection and workflow, particularly with technological advancements in newer systems. Aims and objectives: This study analyzed the factors associated with treatment feasibility and cancellation in Gamma Knife 4C (GK4C) radiosurgery and explored potential benefits of upgrading to Gamma Knife Icon (GKI) technology, incorporating evidence on clearance mechanisms and treatment improvements. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 108 consecutive patients planned for GK4C treatment between 2006 and 2020. Data on demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment parameters, and reasons for cancellation were collected. Statistical analyses examined associations between variables and treatment feasibility. Hypothetical GKI plans assessed potential improvements. A PubMed review identified 69 studies that addressed treatment cancellation and technological improvements. Results: The main reasons for GK4C cancellation were clearance issues (41.7%), high organ-at-risk doses (35.2%), and large target volumes (23.1%). Associations were found between reason for cancellation and tumor volume, diagnosis, location, and prescribed dose. Multivariate analysis showed skull base and peripheral lesions had higher odds of clearance issues. Literature confirms that frame distortion, limited space, and inadequate collision detection are primary GK4C system limitations. GKI plans demonstrated improved target coverage and reduced organ-at-risk doses. Conclusion: Clearance is a major limitation of GK4C radiosurgery, particularly for certain tumor locations and volumes. Literature supports that GKI technology improves treatment feasibility through frameless options, cone-beam CT guidance, enhanced collision detection, and improved stability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41409185PMC12708000What 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.