Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom
Purpose To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude‐gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three‐dimensional‐printed phantoms. Methods Four patient‐specific...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of applied clinical medical physics 2019-02, Vol.20 (2), p.107-113 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 113 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 107 |
container_title | Journal of applied clinical medical physics |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Lee, Minsik Yoon, KyoungJun Cho, Byungchul Kim, Su Ssan Song, Si Yeol Choi, Eun Kyung Ahn, SeungDo Lee, Sang‐Wook Kwak, JungWon |
description | Purpose
To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude‐gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three‐dimensional‐printed phantoms.
Methods
Four patient‐specific moving lung phantoms that closely simulate the heterogeneity of lung tissue and breathing patterns were fabricated with four planning computed tomography (CT) images for lung SBRT cases. The phantoms were designed to be bisected for the measurement of two‐dimensional dose distributions by using EBT3 dosimetry film. The dosimetric accuracy of treatment under respiratory motion was analyzed with the gamma index (2%/1 mm) between the plan dose and film dose measured under phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT. For the validation of the direct usage of the real‐time position management (RPM) data for respiratory motion, the relationship between the RPM signal and the diaphragm position was measured by four‐dimensional CT. By using data recorded during the beam delivery of both phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT, the total time intervals were compared for each treatment mode.
Results
Film dosimetry showed a 5.2 ± 4.2% difference of gamma passing rate (2%/1 mm) on average between the phase‐ vs amplitude‐gated VMAT [77.7% (72.7%–85.9%) for the phase mode and 82.9% (81.4%–86.2%) for the amplitude mode]. For delivery efficiency, frequent interruptions were observed during the phase‐gated VMAT, which stopped the beam delivery and required a certain amount of time before resuming the beam. This abnormality in phase‐gated VMAT caused a prolonged treatment delivery time of 366 s compared with 183 s for amplitude‐gated VMAT.
Conclusions
Considering the dosimetric accuracy and delivery efficacy between the gating methods, amplitude mode is superior to phase mode for gated VMAT treatment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/acm2.12533 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6371017</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2179444162</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5423-2e97b9d4e7126c6496e983a09310d4738047e6f893a2932f69f6b6308ef5e883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EoqWw4QGQJTYIaYoviWNvkKopN6mITfeWxzmZcRXHwXZazY43KM_Ik-A0ZVRYsLJ1_Ok7v_Uj9JKSU0oIe2esZ6eU1Zw_Qse0ZmKlFK0eP7gfoWcpXRFCqeTyKTriRIimlvQY3a6DH010wxaPO5Pg14-f2AwtNn7sXZ7aebA1GVp8HfrJQ47OYh_aqb8bmmhx3kE04x53IeKUIULIxuaCbUK7x9G0zmQXhgM3pXkbP8djWTtL-mnZPuTgn6MnnekTvLg_T9Dlxw-X68-ri2-fvqzPLla2rhhfMVDNRrUVNJQJKyolQEluiOKUtFXDJakaEJ1U3DDFWSdUJzaCEwldDVLyE_R-0Y7TxkNrYcjR9Lok8ibudTBO__0yuJ3ehmsteEMJbYrgzb0ghu8TpKy9Sxb63gwQpqQZbVRVVVSwgr7-B70KUxzK7zRjomRndT0L3y6UjSGlCN0hDCV6rlnPNeu7mgv86mH8A_qn1wLQBbhxPez_o9Jn669skf4G0vS2Qw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2266492557</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Free</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Lee, Minsik ; Yoon, KyoungJun ; Cho, Byungchul ; Kim, Su Ssan ; Song, Si Yeol ; Choi, Eun Kyung ; Ahn, SeungDo ; Lee, Sang‐Wook ; Kwak, JungWon</creator><creatorcontrib>Lee, Minsik ; Yoon, KyoungJun ; Cho, Byungchul ; Kim, Su Ssan ; Song, Si Yeol ; Choi, Eun Kyung ; Ahn, SeungDo ; Lee, Sang‐Wook ; Kwak, JungWon</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude‐gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three‐dimensional‐printed phantoms.
Methods
Four patient‐specific moving lung phantoms that closely simulate the heterogeneity of lung tissue and breathing patterns were fabricated with four planning computed tomography (CT) images for lung SBRT cases. The phantoms were designed to be bisected for the measurement of two‐dimensional dose distributions by using EBT3 dosimetry film. The dosimetric accuracy of treatment under respiratory motion was analyzed with the gamma index (2%/1 mm) between the plan dose and film dose measured under phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT. For the validation of the direct usage of the real‐time position management (RPM) data for respiratory motion, the relationship between the RPM signal and the diaphragm position was measured by four‐dimensional CT. By using data recorded during the beam delivery of both phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT, the total time intervals were compared for each treatment mode.
Results
Film dosimetry showed a 5.2 ± 4.2% difference of gamma passing rate (2%/1 mm) on average between the phase‐ vs amplitude‐gated VMAT [77.7% (72.7%–85.9%) for the phase mode and 82.9% (81.4%–86.2%) for the amplitude mode]. For delivery efficiency, frequent interruptions were observed during the phase‐gated VMAT, which stopped the beam delivery and required a certain amount of time before resuming the beam. This abnormality in phase‐gated VMAT caused a prolonged treatment delivery time of 366 s compared with 183 s for amplitude‐gated VMAT.
Conclusions
Considering the dosimetric accuracy and delivery efficacy between the gating methods, amplitude mode is superior to phase mode for gated VMAT treatment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12533</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30667581</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>3D print ; 4D lung phantom ; Accuracy ; amplitude‐gated VMAT ; Cancer therapies ; Dosimetry ; Drug dosages ; Lung cancer ; lung SBRT ; phase‐gated VMAT ; Radiation Oncology Physics ; Radiation therapy ; Respiration ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019-02, Vol.20 (2), p.107-113</ispartof><rights>2019 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.</rights><rights>2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.</rights><rights>2019. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5423-2e97b9d4e7126c6496e983a09310d4738047e6f893a2932f69f6b6308ef5e883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5423-2e97b9d4e7126c6496e983a09310d4738047e6f893a2932f69f6b6308ef5e883</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6371017/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6371017/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30667581$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lee, Minsik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, KyoungJun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Byungchul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Su Ssan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Si Yeol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Eun Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, SeungDo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Sang‐Wook</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kwak, JungWon</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom</title><title>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</title><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><description>Purpose
To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude‐gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three‐dimensional‐printed phantoms.
Methods
Four patient‐specific moving lung phantoms that closely simulate the heterogeneity of lung tissue and breathing patterns were fabricated with four planning computed tomography (CT) images for lung SBRT cases. The phantoms were designed to be bisected for the measurement of two‐dimensional dose distributions by using EBT3 dosimetry film. The dosimetric accuracy of treatment under respiratory motion was analyzed with the gamma index (2%/1 mm) between the plan dose and film dose measured under phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT. For the validation of the direct usage of the real‐time position management (RPM) data for respiratory motion, the relationship between the RPM signal and the diaphragm position was measured by four‐dimensional CT. By using data recorded during the beam delivery of both phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT, the total time intervals were compared for each treatment mode.
Results
Film dosimetry showed a 5.2 ± 4.2% difference of gamma passing rate (2%/1 mm) on average between the phase‐ vs amplitude‐gated VMAT [77.7% (72.7%–85.9%) for the phase mode and 82.9% (81.4%–86.2%) for the amplitude mode]. For delivery efficiency, frequent interruptions were observed during the phase‐gated VMAT, which stopped the beam delivery and required a certain amount of time before resuming the beam. This abnormality in phase‐gated VMAT caused a prolonged treatment delivery time of 366 s compared with 183 s for amplitude‐gated VMAT.
Conclusions
Considering the dosimetric accuracy and delivery efficacy between the gating methods, amplitude mode is superior to phase mode for gated VMAT treatment.</description><subject>3D print</subject><subject>4D lung phantom</subject><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>amplitude‐gated VMAT</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Dosimetry</subject><subject>Drug dosages</subject><subject>Lung cancer</subject><subject>lung SBRT</subject><subject>phase‐gated VMAT</subject><subject>Radiation Oncology Physics</subject><subject>Radiation therapy</subject><subject>Respiration</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>1526-9914</issn><issn>1526-9914</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EoqWw4QGQJTYIaYoviWNvkKopN6mITfeWxzmZcRXHwXZazY43KM_Ik-A0ZVRYsLJ1_Ok7v_Uj9JKSU0oIe2esZ6eU1Zw_Qse0ZmKlFK0eP7gfoWcpXRFCqeTyKTriRIimlvQY3a6DH010wxaPO5Pg14-f2AwtNn7sXZ7aebA1GVp8HfrJQ47OYh_aqb8bmmhx3kE04x53IeKUIULIxuaCbUK7x9G0zmQXhgM3pXkbP8djWTtL-mnZPuTgn6MnnekTvLg_T9Dlxw-X68-ri2-fvqzPLla2rhhfMVDNRrUVNJQJKyolQEluiOKUtFXDJakaEJ1U3DDFWSdUJzaCEwldDVLyE_R-0Y7TxkNrYcjR9Lok8ibudTBO__0yuJ3ehmsteEMJbYrgzb0ghu8TpKy9Sxb63gwQpqQZbVRVVVSwgr7-B70KUxzK7zRjomRndT0L3y6UjSGlCN0hDCV6rlnPNeu7mgv86mH8A_qn1wLQBbhxPez_o9Jn669skf4G0vS2Qw</recordid><startdate>201902</startdate><enddate>201902</enddate><creator>Lee, Minsik</creator><creator>Yoon, KyoungJun</creator><creator>Cho, Byungchul</creator><creator>Kim, Su Ssan</creator><creator>Song, Si Yeol</creator><creator>Choi, Eun Kyung</creator><creator>Ahn, SeungDo</creator><creator>Lee, Sang‐Wook</creator><creator>Kwak, JungWon</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201902</creationdate><title>Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom</title><author>Lee, Minsik ; Yoon, KyoungJun ; Cho, Byungchul ; Kim, Su Ssan ; Song, Si Yeol ; Choi, Eun Kyung ; Ahn, SeungDo ; Lee, Sang‐Wook ; Kwak, JungWon</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5423-2e97b9d4e7126c6496e983a09310d4738047e6f893a2932f69f6b6308ef5e883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>3D print</topic><topic>4D lung phantom</topic><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>amplitude‐gated VMAT</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Dosimetry</topic><topic>Drug dosages</topic><topic>Lung cancer</topic><topic>lung SBRT</topic><topic>phase‐gated VMAT</topic><topic>Radiation Oncology Physics</topic><topic>Radiation therapy</topic><topic>Respiration</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, Minsik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, KyoungJun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Byungchul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Su Ssan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Si Yeol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Eun Kyung</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, SeungDo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Sang‐Wook</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kwak, JungWon</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, Minsik</au><au>Yoon, KyoungJun</au><au>Cho, Byungchul</au><au>Kim, Su Ssan</au><au>Song, Si Yeol</au><au>Choi, Eun Kyung</au><au>Ahn, SeungDo</au><au>Lee, Sang‐Wook</au><au>Kwak, JungWon</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><date>2019-02</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>107</spage><epage>113</epage><pages>107-113</pages><issn>1526-9914</issn><eissn>1526-9914</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To compare the dosimetric impact and treatment delivery efficacy of phase‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs amplitude‐gated VMAT for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for lung cancer by using realistic three‐dimensional‐printed phantoms.
Methods
Four patient‐specific moving lung phantoms that closely simulate the heterogeneity of lung tissue and breathing patterns were fabricated with four planning computed tomography (CT) images for lung SBRT cases. The phantoms were designed to be bisected for the measurement of two‐dimensional dose distributions by using EBT3 dosimetry film. The dosimetric accuracy of treatment under respiratory motion was analyzed with the gamma index (2%/1 mm) between the plan dose and film dose measured under phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT. For the validation of the direct usage of the real‐time position management (RPM) data for respiratory motion, the relationship between the RPM signal and the diaphragm position was measured by four‐dimensional CT. By using data recorded during the beam delivery of both phase‐ and amplitude‐gated VMAT, the total time intervals were compared for each treatment mode.
Results
Film dosimetry showed a 5.2 ± 4.2% difference of gamma passing rate (2%/1 mm) on average between the phase‐ vs amplitude‐gated VMAT [77.7% (72.7%–85.9%) for the phase mode and 82.9% (81.4%–86.2%) for the amplitude mode]. For delivery efficiency, frequent interruptions were observed during the phase‐gated VMAT, which stopped the beam delivery and required a certain amount of time before resuming the beam. This abnormality in phase‐gated VMAT caused a prolonged treatment delivery time of 366 s compared with 183 s for amplitude‐gated VMAT.
Conclusions
Considering the dosimetric accuracy and delivery efficacy between the gating methods, amplitude mode is superior to phase mode for gated VMAT treatment.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>30667581</pmid><doi>10.1002/acm2.12533</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1526-9914 |
ispartof | Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2019-02, Vol.20 (2), p.107-113 |
issn | 1526-9914 1526-9914 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6371017 |
source | Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; PubMed Central Free; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Wiley Online Library Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | 3D print 4D lung phantom Accuracy amplitude‐gated VMAT Cancer therapies Dosimetry Drug dosages Lung cancer lung SBRT phase‐gated VMAT Radiation Oncology Physics Radiation therapy Respiration Tumors |
title | Comparing phase‐ and amplitude‐gated volumetric modulated arc therapy for stereotactic body radiation therapy using 3D printed lung phantom |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T00%3A35%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20phase%E2%80%90%20and%20amplitude%E2%80%90gated%20volumetric%20modulated%20arc%20therapy%20for%20stereotactic%20body%20radiation%20therapy%20using%203D%20printed%20lung%20phantom&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20clinical%20medical%20physics&rft.au=Lee,%20Minsik&rft.date=2019-02&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=107&rft.epage=113&rft.pages=107-113&rft.issn=1526-9914&rft.eissn=1526-9914&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/acm2.12533&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2179444162%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2266492557&rft_id=info:pmid/30667581&rfr_iscdi=true |