BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To quantify the accuracy and reproducibility of patient repositioning in fractionated stereotactic conformal radiotherapy (SCRT) using dental fixations in conjunction with a stereotactic head mask. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and fourteen verification CT scans were performed on 57 patients in order to check set-up alignment. The first scan was done immediately after the first treatment. Twelve patients were checked for alignment accuracy with weekly CT scans over a period of 3-6 weeks, all others had 1-2 scans. Two different dental fixations were used in combination with a non-invasive mask system: an upper jaw support (35 patients) and a customised bite-block (17 patients). Five patients were treated with no additional fixation. Co-registration to the planning CT was used to assess alignment of the isocentre to the reference markers. Additionally, the intra-operator variability of image co-registration was assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement of the overall alignment in using the bite-block instead of the upper jaw support (P<0.001). The mean deviation was for the bite-block 2.2+/-1.1 mm (1 SD), for the upper jaw support 3.3+/-1.8 mm and 3.7+/-2.8 mm for the mask alone. Overall isocentre deviations independent of the method of fixation were 2.8 mm (1.7 mm, 1 SD). Displacements in CC direction were significantly less for the bite-block compared to the upper jaw support (P=0.03). The addition of an upper jaw support significantly reduced lateral rotations compared to the mask system alone (P=0.03). The intra-operator variability of image co-registration was 1.59+/-0.49 mm (1 SD). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of patient positioning using a re-locatable head mask system combined with a bite-block is within the reported range for similar devices and is preferable to a simple upper jaw support. In order to further reduce the margin for the planning target volume an intra-oral dental fixation is recommended.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To quantify the accuracy and reproducibility of patient repositioning in fractionated stereotactic conformal radiotherapy (SCRT) using dental fixations in conjunction with a stereotactic head mask. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and fourteen verification CT scans were performed on 57 patients in order to check set-up alignment. The first scan was done immediately after the first treatment. Twelve patients were checked for alignment accuracy with weekly CT scans over a period of 3-6 weeks, all others had 1-2 scans. Two different dental fixations were used in combination with a non-invasive mask system: an upper jaw support (35 patients) and a customised bite-block (17 patients). Five patients were treated with no additional fixation. Co-registration to the planning CT was used to assess alignment of the isocentre to the reference markers. Additionally, the intra-operator variability of image co-registration was assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement of the overall alignment in using the bite-block instead of the upper jaw support (P<0.001). The mean deviation was for the bite-block 2.2+/-1.1 mm (1 SD), for the upper jaw support 3.3+/-1.8 mm and 3.7+/-2.8 mm for the mask alone. Overall isocentre deviations independent of the method of fixation were 2.8 mm (1.7 mm, 1 SD). Displacements in CC direction were significantly less for the bite-block compared to the upper jaw support (P=0.03). The addition of an upper jaw support significantly reduced lateral rotations compared to the mask system alone (P=0.03). The intra-operator variability of image co-registration was 1.59+/-0.49 mm (1 SD). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility of patient positioning using a re-locatable head mask system combined with a bite-block is within the reported range for similar devices and is preferable to a simple upper jaw support. In order to further reduce the margin for the planning target volume an intra-oral dental fixation is recommended.
Authors: Shidong Li; Lawrence R Kleinberg; Daniele Rigamonti; Moody D Wharam; Abdul Rashid; Juan Jackson; David Djajaputra; Shenjen He; Tunisia Creasey; Theodore L DeWeese Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-12
Authors: I Compter; K Zaugg; R M A Houben; J T A Dings; G Bosmans; C Buescher; M M H M E Anten; B G Baumert Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-09-09 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: A Theelen; J Martens; G Bosmans; R Houben; J J Jager; I Rutten; P Lambin; A W Minken; B G Baumert Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2011-12-24 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Martin Kocher; Andrea Wittig; Marc Dieter Piroth; Harald Treuer; Heinrich Seegenschmiedt; Maximilian Ruge; Anca-Ligia Grosu; Matthias Guckenberger Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Matthias Guckenberger; Johannes Roesch; Kurt Baier; Reinhart A Sweeney; Michael Flentje Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 3.481