This study evaluates the clinical feasibility and surface conformity of ClearFit2-Encapsulated, a technical configuration implemented to facilitate the clinical use of highly adhesive transparent boluses through a film-dressing encapsulation method for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). ClearFit2 was encapsulated with a thin polyurethane film. Following benchmark phantom comparisons of three bolus configurations (ClearFit1, ClearFit2, and ClearFit2-Encapsulated) using planning CT, clinical performance was evaluated in eight PMRT patients using weekly cone-beam CT (CBCT) to quantify air-gap distances. In phantom evaluation, mean gaps were 3.9 ± 3.1 mm for ClearFit1, 0.9 ± 0.9 mm for ClearFit2, and 2.2 ± 2.2 mm for ClearFit2-Encapsulated. In clinical evaluation, the median air-gap distance across all cases was 1.1 mm (range: 0.6-1.7 mm), with 88.2% of the interface area maintaining gaps ≤ 3 mm. ClearFit2-Encapsulated demonstrates high surface conformity and clinical feasibility, providing a practical bolus-handling solution for patients undergoing PMRT.
{"title":"Encapsulated configuration of a flexible transparent adhesive bolus to improve surface conformity and skin safety in post-mastectomy radiation therapy.","authors":"Hideharu Miura, Kenji Kanemoto, Toshiya Okazue, Shuichi Ozawa, Masahiro Kenjo","doi":"10.1007/s12194-026-01037-x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-026-01037-x","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluates the clinical feasibility and surface conformity of ClearFit2-Encapsulated, a technical configuration implemented to facilitate the clinical use of highly adhesive transparent boluses through a film-dressing encapsulation method for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). ClearFit2 was encapsulated with a thin polyurethane film. Following benchmark phantom comparisons of three bolus configurations (ClearFit1, ClearFit2, and ClearFit2-Encapsulated) using planning CT, clinical performance was evaluated in eight PMRT patients using weekly cone-beam CT (CBCT) to quantify air-gap distances. In phantom evaluation, mean gaps were 3.9 ± 3.1 mm for ClearFit1, 0.9 ± 0.9 mm for ClearFit2, and 2.2 ± 2.2 mm for ClearFit2-Encapsulated. In clinical evaluation, the median air-gap distance across all cases was 1.1 mm (range: 0.6-1.7 mm), with 88.2% of the interface area maintaining gaps ≤ 3 mm. ClearFit2-Encapsulated demonstrates high surface conformity and clinical feasibility, providing a practical bolus-handling solution for patients undergoing PMRT.</p>","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147505103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-19DOI: 10.1007/s12194-026-01039-9
Sandhya Rottoo, Luke Frangella, Magdalena Bazalova-Carter, Olivia Masella
{"title":"Development of a 3D-printed canine head phantom for veterinary radiotherapy.","authors":"Sandhya Rottoo, Luke Frangella, Magdalena Bazalova-Carter, Olivia Masella","doi":"10.1007/s12194-026-01039-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-026-01039-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147487870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Comprehensive estimation of patient radiation exposure in hip joint surgery using a tissue-equivalent phantom.","authors":"Eriko Koga, Kaori Tominaga, Toshioh Fujibuchi, Shinji Shigemori, Yoshihiro Kozawa, Tokitaka Ueno, Yukihisa Takayama, Kengo Yoshimitsu","doi":"10.1007/s12194-026-01030-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-026-01030-4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147366332","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-05DOI: 10.1007/s12194-026-01032-2
Noah Bice, K Sunshine Osterman, Paulina Galavis, Jinyu Xue, David L Barbee, Jose R Teruel
{"title":"Application of support vector machines for modeling dosimetric uncertainty in radiotherapy planning.","authors":"Noah Bice, K Sunshine Osterman, Paulina Galavis, Jinyu Xue, David L Barbee, Jose R Teruel","doi":"10.1007/s12194-026-01032-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-026-01032-2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147356229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-04DOI: 10.1007/s12194-026-01035-z
Thomas Saliba, David Rotzinger, Giuseppe Gullo
{"title":"Augmented-reality enhanced ultrasound guidance: a sterile, hands-free approach using commercial augmented reality headsets.","authors":"Thomas Saliba, David Rotzinger, Giuseppe Gullo","doi":"10.1007/s12194-026-01035-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-026-01035-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147356288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study evaluated the dose calculation accuracy of a Monte Carlo (MC)-based independent dose calculation system (IDCS) for CyberKnife brain stereotactic treatment plans and compared it with ray-tracing (RT) and MC algorithms within the MultiPlan treatment planning system (TPS). Beam modeling accuracy was validated for 11 circular fields using measured output factors (OPF), percentage depth dose (PDD), and off-center ratio (OCR). A total of 200 retrospective brain stereotactic treatment plans were analyzed (50 prescribed 23 Gy in 1 fraction, 50 prescribed 35 Gy in 3 fractions, and 100 prescribed 41.5 Gy in 5 fractions). Among these, 24 quality assurance (QA) plans were evaluated using homogeneous cylindrical phantoms and ionization chambers. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) was calculated, and gamma analysis (3%/1 mm, 10% threshold) was performed. IDCS aligned with measured data, with OPF and PDD/OCR errors within 3% and 4%, respectively, except for small-field underestimations in the build-up region. For QA plans, TPS overestimated the measured dose (RT: 0.5% ± 2.6%, p = 0.58, MC: 1.7% ± 3.1%, p = 0.07), while IDCS underestimated it (- 1.3% ± 2.3%, p = 0.07). Gamma passing rates were 98.9% ± 1.5% (TPS-RT vs. IDCS) and 99.9% ± 0.3% (TPS-MC vs. IDCS). DVH metrics (planning target volume [PTV]: D98%, D95%, and D2%) showed clinically acceptable differences. IDCS showed greater dose calculation accuracy than the TPS-RT algorithm and could identify dose discrepancies in specific cases, thereby confirming its reliability for CyberKnife QA.
{"title":"Evaluation of a Monte Carlo-based independent dose calculation system for brain stereotactic radiotherapy using a robotic radiosurgery system.","authors":"Kaito Sakai, Yujiro Nakajima, Yuhi Suda, Fumiya Tsurumaki, Kohki Yasui, Yu Arai, Takuto Takizawa, Satoshi Kito, Keiko Nemoto Murofushi, Yukio Fujita, Naoki Tohyama","doi":"10.1007/s12194-025-00976-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s12194-025-00976-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study evaluated the dose calculation accuracy of a Monte Carlo (MC)-based independent dose calculation system (IDCS) for CyberKnife brain stereotactic treatment plans and compared it with ray-tracing (RT) and MC algorithms within the MultiPlan treatment planning system (TPS). Beam modeling accuracy was validated for 11 circular fields using measured output factors (OPF), percentage depth dose (PDD), and off-center ratio (OCR). A total of 200 retrospective brain stereotactic treatment plans were analyzed (50 prescribed 23 Gy in 1 fraction, 50 prescribed 35 Gy in 3 fractions, and 100 prescribed 41.5 Gy in 5 fractions). Among these, 24 quality assurance (QA) plans were evaluated using homogeneous cylindrical phantoms and ionization chambers. Dose-volume histogram (DVH) was calculated, and gamma analysis (3%/1 mm, 10% threshold) was performed. IDCS aligned with measured data, with OPF and PDD/OCR errors within 3% and 4%, respectively, except for small-field underestimations in the build-up region. For QA plans, TPS overestimated the measured dose (RT: 0.5% ± 2.6%, p = 0.58, MC: 1.7% ± 3.1%, p = 0.07), while IDCS underestimated it (- 1.3% ± 2.3%, p = 0.07). Gamma passing rates were 98.9% ± 1.5% (TPS-RT vs. IDCS) and 99.9% ± 0.3% (TPS-MC vs. IDCS). DVH metrics (planning target volume [PTV]: D<sub>98%</sub>, D<sub>95%</sub>, and D<sub>2%</sub>) showed clinically acceptable differences. IDCS showed greater dose calculation accuracy than the TPS-RT algorithm and could identify dose discrepancies in specific cases, thereby confirming its reliability for CyberKnife QA.</p>","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":"68-76"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145309513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-01Epub Date: 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1007/s12194-025-01002-0
Le Tien Dat, Pham Quang Trung
{"title":"Implementation of deep learning with convolutional block attention module for detecting collimator rotation errors in stereotactic radiosurgery quality assurance.","authors":"Le Tien Dat, Pham Quang Trung","doi":"10.1007/s12194-025-01002-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s12194-025-01002-0","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46252,"journal":{"name":"Radiological Physics and Technology","volume":" ","pages":"233-242"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145901040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号