Literature DB >> 14752732

Effects of motion on the total dose distribution.

Thomas Bortfeld1, Steve B Jiang, Eike Rietzel.   

Abstract

The success of highly target-conformal treatments such as intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) can be compromised by motion of the inner organs and random patient setup errors. This article gives an overview of different studies that looked at the effect of organ motion and setup errors on radiation therapy dose distributions, both from a qualitative and quantitative point of view. The qualitative findings are generally applicable (ie, case independent). It is found that motion always leads to a blurring of the dose distribution. In addition, there are so-called interplay effects if the treatment delivery involves moving parts, such as multileaf collimators. After a large number of fractions, the interplay effects lead to a normal distribution of the dose value around the average blurred value. Thirdly, organ motion can also cause a spatial deformation of the dose distribution. Quantitatively it has been found that both deformation and interplay effects appear to be small (in the order of 1%-2%) in many typical clinical cases. The dominant effect is the blurring of the dose distribution, which is, in essence, independent of the treatment technique, and is not more pronounced in IMRT than in more conventional treatment techniques. However, because in IMRT there is a tendency to reduce or compromise target margins, the blurring has potentially a bigger effect on the outcome of IMRT, unless precision dose delivery techniques (such as gated or motion-synchronized beams) are used. An alternative to the use of margins is to do the planning based on blurred dose distributions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14752732     DOI: 10.1053/j.semradonc.2003.10.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1053-4296            Impact factor:   5.934


  77 in total

1.  Feasibility of intrafraction whole-body motion tracking for total marrow irradiation.

Authors:  Manju Sharma; Troy Dos Santos; Nikolaos P Papanikolopoulos; Susanta Kumar Hui
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  The dosimetric impact of inversely optimized arc radiotherapy plan modulation for real-time dynamic MLC tracking delivery.

Authors:  Marianne Falk; Tobias Larsson; Paul Keall; Byung Chul Cho; Marianne Aznar; Stine Korreman; Per Poulsen; Per Munck Af Rosenschold
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Predictive modeling of lung motion over the entire respiratory cycle using measured pressure-volume data, 4DCT images, and finite-element analysis.

Authors:  Jaesung Eom; Xie George Xu; Suvranu De; Chengyu Shi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Comparisons of the impact of systematic uncertainties in patient setup and prostate motion on doses to the target among different plans for definitive external-beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Su Yu Zhu; Takashi Mizowaki; Yoshiki Norihisa; Kenji Takayama; Yasushi Nagata; Masahiro Hiraoka
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Assessment of dose reconstruction errors in image-guided radiation therapy.

Authors:  Hualiang Zhong; Elisabeth Weiss; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Reducing the sensitivity of IMPT treatment plans to setup errors and range uncertainties via probabilistic treatment planning.

Authors:  Jan Unkelbach; Thomas Bortfeld; Benjamin C Martin; Martin Soukup
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  A method of dose reconstruction for moving targets compatible with dynamic treatments.

Authors:  Per Rugaard Poulsen; Mai Lykkegaard Schmidt; Paul Keall; Esben Schjodt Worm; Walther Fledelius; Lone Hoffmann
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Tumor trailing strategy for intensity-modulated radiation therapy of moving targets.

Authors:  Alexei Trofimov; Christian Vrancic; Timothy C Y Chan; Gregory C Sharp; Thomas Bortfeld
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Quantifying the interplay effect in prostate IMRT delivery using a convolution-based method.

Authors:  Haisen S Li; Indrin J Chetty; Timothy D Solberg
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Real-time dynamic MLC tracking for inversely optimized arc radiotherapy.

Authors:  Marianne Falk; Per Munck af Rosenschöld; Paul Keall; Herbert Cattell; Byung Chul Cho; Per Poulsen; Sergey Povzner; Amit Sawant; Jens Zimmerman; Stine Korreman
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 6.280

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.