ArticleCureus2026
Efficient X-Ray Source Probe Adjustment of the Intrabeam Intraoperative Radiotherapy System.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) delivers, at the time of surgery, a large dose of radiation in a single fraction to a target area directly accessible to the surgeon in the operating room (OR), allowing for increased dose to the target and decreased dose to nearby normal tissues. Delivery of IORT to a patient requires that pertinent quality assurance (QA) checks of the system be successfully executed to ensure appropriate treatment. A widely used IORT system presently is the Intrabeam unit (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany), an electronic brachytherapy system which uses a compact low-energy X-ray source (XRS) mounted on a semi-robotic arm. To deliver IORT treatments using the Intrabeam system, two initial QA tests must be conducted to ensure that the isotropy and the output of the radiation source are both within tolerance. Whenever the initial isotropy check fails, indicating that the probe of the XRS is misaligned, an additional QA procedure meant to realign the probe becomes mandatory. This latter probe-adjustment procedure involves an interplay between the operator manipulating a special QA device around the XRS probe while the system monitors, continuously and in real time, the extent of misalignment of the probe. With a system-specified tolerance for probe eccentricity to be <0.1 mm, this interplay can result repeatedly in false-negative results due to artifacts unrelated to probe alignment, such as XRS manipulation by the user, potentially causing significant delays in initiation of the IORT treatment. We suggest a modified probe realignment procedure whereby measuring artifacts arising while the user manipulates the QA device are disregarded, and instead only artifact-free misalignment readings, i.e., while the device is not being manipulated, are considered. This modification is meant solely to improve efficiency, is based on workflow experience rather than any related quantitative measurements, and does not involve any changes to system tolerances or QA test acceptance criteria. A more efficient realization of the required set of preoperative QA tests could save significant time for the medical teams involved, as well as reduce the total time a patient is maintained under general anesthesia.
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.