Literature DB >> 15752877

Prostate motion and isocenter adjustment from ultrasound-based localization during delivery of radiation therapy.

Albert Y C Fung1, Charles A Enke, Komanduri M Ayyangar, Natarajan V Raman, Weining Zhen, Robert B Thompson, Sicong Li, Ramasamy M Nehru, Sushakumari Pillai.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To study prostate motion from 4,154 ultrasound alignment fractions on 130 prostate patients treated with conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiation therapy at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Each prostate patient was immobilized in a vacuum cradle. Daily treatment was verified by ultrasound scan after laser setup with skin marks and before radiation delivery by the same physician responsible for anatomic delineation during planning. Directional statistics were employed to test the significance of shift directions.
RESULTS: Polar histograms showed the prevalence of prostate motion in superior-posterior directions. The average direction was about 27 degrees from the superior axis. The average changes of prostate position in superior to inferior (SI), anterior-posterior (AP), and left to right (LR) directions and in radial distance were 0.25, -0.13, 0.03, and 0.92, cm respectively. Our data indicated that prostate motion was not patient specific, and its average magnitude remained virtually unchanged over time. Recommended planning target volume (PTV) margins for use without ultrasound localization were 0.90 cm in SI, 1.02 cm in AP, and 0.80 cm in LR directions.
CONCLUSION: Ultrasound localization revealed a predominance of prostate shift from planning position in the superior-posterior direction, with an average closer to the superior axis. The motion data provides recommended margins for PTV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15752877     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.07.727

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  8 in total

Review 1.  Management of the complications of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Robert B Nadler
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography image quality assurance for Vero4DRT system.

Authors:  Hideharu Miura; Shuichi Ozawa; Masahiro Hayata; Shintarou Tsuda; Tsubasa Enosaki; Kiyoshi Yamada; Yasushi Nagata
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2017-04-25

3.  A survey of image-guided radiation therapy use in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel R Simpson; Joshua D Lawson; Sameer K Nath; Brent S Rose; Arno J Mundt; Loren K Mell
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Tracking target position variability using intraprostatic fiducial markers and electronic portal imaging in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  F Munoz; C Fiandra; P Franco; A Guarneri; P Ciammella; P De Stefanis; N Rondi; F Moretto; S Badellino; C Iftode; R Ragona; U Ricardi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Dosimetric impact of intrafractional patient motion in pediatric brain tumor patients.

Authors:  Chris Beltran; John Trussell; Thomas E Merchant
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 1.482

6.  Comparison of daily couch shifts using MVCT (TomoTherapy) and B-mode ultrasound (BAT System) during prostate radiotherapy.

Authors:  Steven H Lin; Elizabeth Sugar; Terrance Teslow; Todd McNutt; Habeeb Saleh; Danny Y Song
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2008-08

7.  Comparison of transabdominal ultrasound and electromagnetic transponders for prostate localization.

Authors:  Ryan D Foster; Timothy D Solberg; Haisen S Li; Andrew Kerkhoff; Charles A Enke; Twyla R Willoughby; Patrick A Kupelian
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  The impact of the three degrees-of-freedom fiducial marker-based setup compared to soft tissue-based setup in hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Satoshi Tanabe; Satoru Utsunomiya; Eisuke Abe; Hiraku Sato; Atsushi Ohta; Hironori Sakai; Takumi Yamada; Motoki Kaidu; Hidefumi Aoyama
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2019-05-04       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.