Use of Platinum Embolization Coils for Targeting Liver Lesions in Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy/Radiosurgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Liver lesions cannot be directly visualized at the time of radiation treatments using conventional imaging techniques. Metal markers are often used as surrogates of tumor location which are visible on portal images. The objective of this work was to describe the use of platinum embolization coils for this purpose. Methods: Eight patients with hepatic lesions scheduled for stereotactic liver radiotherapy were implanted with 2 platinum coils. 14 cm × 0.889 mm coils were inserted percutaneously to form 4-mm emboli. The coils were outlined on planning digitally reconstructed radiographs, which were registered with respiratory-gated pretreatment daily megavoltage portal images for target localization. The number of coil visualizations and distance between coils was noted for each patient at each treatment. Results: Coil insertion was followed by mild transient hepatalgia in 2 patients. Coils were visible in 100/109 megavoltage setup images. Significant coil migration was not seen: the median change in distance between coils from planning to treatment was 0.4 mm in anterior-posterior projections and 1.5 mm in lateral projections. Conclusion: We have found platinum coils to be a useful aid to the targeting of intrahepatic lesions treated with liver radiosurgery/radiotherapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".