ArticleCureus2025
ZAP-X Stereotactic Radiosurgery: The Initial Experience Involving 200 Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Necrosis and Neurotoxicity of the Brainstem Following Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Trigeminal Neuralgia: How Much is Too Much?Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Stereotactic radiosurgery using a self-shielded gyroscopic radiosurgery system for meningiomas: technical aspects and dosimetric results.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ZAP-X (ZAP Surgical Systems, Inc., San Carlos, CA) is the newest dedicated cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) platform. A prospective study was conducted between October 2023 and January 2025 involving 200 patients with 374 intracranial targets treated using ZAP-X. The study aimed to assess the feasibility of the ZAP-X workflow, as well as its safety, clinical and dosimetric performance, and patient satisfaction. The study cohort included various central nervous system pathologies, including 106 brain metastases (BM), 42 meningiomas (MA), 18 trigeminal neuralgias (TN), 11 acoustic neuromas (AN), nine recurrent glioblastomas (RGBM), seven pituitary adenomas (PA), three spinal tumors (ST), three arteriovenous malformations (AVM), and one cavernous hemangioma of the pons (HM). The average number of patients treated per month was 13 ± 2, and the average number of treatments per month was 35 ± 9. The maximum number of patients treated in a day was five. The average gamma passing rate was 98.5 ± 1.7% (91.2 - 100%) at a 10% low-dose threshold, 2% dose difference, and 1 mm distance-to-agreement. The average conformity index (CI), Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), homogeneity Index (HI), and gradient measure across all patients were 1.3 ± 0.3, 0.77 ± 0.11, 3.3 ± 0.8, 1.5 ± 0.3, and 0.38 ± 0.16 cm, respectively. The largest tumor volume treated was 29.29 cm
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.