ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2026
Stabilised Hyaluronic Acid Gel Rectal Spacers in MRI-Guided Brachytherapy for Gynaecological Cancers: A Prospective Feasibility Study.
Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate insertion feasibility of a stabilised hyaluronic acid (sHA) gel rectal spacer in gynaecological cancer high dose rate brachytherapy (GynBT).
methodsThis single institution prospective study included patients with gynaecological cancers receiving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided GynBT. Feasibility was assessed by technical success, clinician user experience, spacer visibility on MRI and spacer stability over the GynBT course.
resultsTwelve patients were included in this study. Insertion of sHA gel into the rectovaginal space was achieved in all 12 patients without spacer-related complications. Clinicians reported sHA gel as easy to use, with high visibility on TRUS (rated 4-5) and excellent visibility on MRI. Target-to-rectum distance increased with sHA spacer insertion (mean 7.82 mm, 95% CI: 5.27-10.36, p < 0.001). During GynBT, there was a reduction in sHA gel spacer volume (mean 1.75 cc, 95% CI: 0.57-2.93, p = 0.007) and craniocaudal distance (mean -3.87 mm, 95% CI: -7.37 to -0.36, p = 0.034). However, there were no significant changes in target-to-rectum distance (p = 0.490) and spacer level measurements (p > 0.2).
conclusionInsertion of sHA gel rectal spacer is technically feasible and safe in GynBT, increasing the separation between the target and rectum. The sHA gel spacer is easy to use, highly visible on both TRUS and MRI, and stable during the entire GynBT course. Further studies are required to ascertain patient suitability, dosimetric comparison, patient-reported outcomes, toxicities, and optimal technique.
trial registrationThe study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12625000167460).
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.