ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026
Stereotactic radiosurgery using a self-shielded gyroscopic radiosurgery system for meningiomas: technical aspects and dosimetric results.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ZAP-X
methodsUnique technical aspects of our treatment workflow using the ZAP-X system encompassing computed tomography simulation, treatment planning, independent dose calculations, patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) and treatment delivery were described. Eighteen single-lesion meningioma patients, who were treated following this workflow, were selected and divided into two groups (Group A [thirteen patients]: 25 Gy in five fractions, FSRS); Group B [five patients]: 15 Gy in a single fraction, SRS). Plan quality metrics, independent dose calculations and PSQA for each group were reviewed and analyzed.
resultsFor Group A, mean age (range) was 60 years (35 years - 80 years) and mean planning target volume (PTV) (range) was 4.78 cc (2.10 cc - 9.38 cc). Mean (range) PTV coverage, prescribed isodose line, Paddick conformity index, gradient index, number of isocenters, number of beams, delivery time estimate per fraction and PSQA gamma passing rate were 99.5% (99.5% - 99.6%), 53.5% (50.1% - 61.3%), 0.89 (0.83-0.93), 2.64 (2.54-2.88), 11.8 (5-19), 208.5 (91-332), 43.6 min (24.5 -61.0 min) and 95.0% (91.5% - 98.4%), respectively. For Group B, corresponding values were 70 years (62 years - 75 years), 1.12 cc (0.77 cc - 1.99 cc), 99.5% (99.5% - 99.5%), 56.4% (50.6% - 62.8%), 0.89 (0.85-0.93), 2.95 (2.63-3.22), 7.2 (5-9), 102.4 (81-132), 33.9 min (27.3 -38.9 min) and 95.3% (91.1% - 100.0%). For all beams in both groups, independent dose calculations were < ± 0.02% of treatment planning system dose calculations.
conclusionsOur experience with SRS and FSRS using the ZAP-X system for meningioma patients demonstrated that a typical external beam radiotherapy workflow was applicable with unique technical aspects, and treatment plans met our institutional planning goals and were concordant with independent dose calculations and PSQA.
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.