PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of two immobilization techniques for pediatric brain tumor patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed data from 128 treatments involving 22 patients. Patients were immobilized with either a relocatable head frame (12 patients) or a vacuum bag (10 patients). Orthogonal portal films were used as verification images. Errors in patient positioning were measured by comparing verification images with digitally reconstructed radiographs generated by a three-dimensional treatment-planning system. RESULTS: With the head frame, systematic errors ranged from 1.4 mm to 2.1 mm; random errors, from 1.7 mm to 2.1 mm. With the vacuum bag, systematic errors ranged from 2.1 mm to 2.5 mm; random errors, from 2.0 mm to 2.6 mm. For the head frame, the mean length of the radial displacement was 4.4 mm; 90% of the total three-dimensional deviation was less than 6.8 mm. The corresponding values for the vacuum bag were 5.0 and 6.6 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The head frame and vacuum bag techniques limit the random and systematic errors in each of the three directions to within +/- 5 mm. We have used these results to determine the margin used to create the planning target volume for conformal radiation therapy.
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of two immobilization techniques for pediatric brain tumorpatients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We analyzed data from 128 treatments involving 22 patients. Patients were immobilized with either a relocatable head frame (12 patients) or a vacuum bag (10 patients). Orthogonal portal films were used as verification images. Errors in patient positioning were measured by comparing verification images with digitally reconstructed radiographs generated by a three-dimensional treatment-planning system. RESULTS: With the head frame, systematic errors ranged from 1.4 mm to 2.1 mm; random errors, from 1.7 mm to 2.1 mm. With the vacuum bag, systematic errors ranged from 2.1 mm to 2.5 mm; random errors, from 2.0 mm to 2.6 mm. For the head frame, the mean length of the radial displacement was 4.4 mm; 90% of the total three-dimensional deviation was less than 6.8 mm. The corresponding values for the vacuum bag were 5.0 and 6.6 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The head frame and vacuum bag techniques limit the random and systematic errors in each of the three directions to within +/- 5 mm. We have used these results to determine the margin used to create the planning target volume for conformal radiation therapy.