Literature DB >> 17821978

Evaluation of the precision of portal-image-guided head-and-neck localization: an intra- and interobserver study.

Laurence E Court1, Aaron Allen, Roy Tishler.   

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that, for some patients, image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer patients may maintain target dose coverage and critical organ (e.g., parotids) dose closer to the planned doses than setup using lasers alone. We investigated inter- and intraobserver uncertainties in patient setup in head-and-neck cancer patients. Twenty-two sets of orthogonal digital portal images (from five patients) were selected from images used for daily localization of head-and-neck patients treated with IMRT. To evaluate interobserver variations, five radiation therapists compared the portal images with the plan digitally reconstructed radiographs and reported shifts for the isocenter (approximately C2) and for a supraclavicular reference point. One therapist repeated the procedure a month later to evaluate intraobserver variations. The procedure was then repeated with teams of two therapists. The frequencies for which agreement between the shift reported by the observer and the daily mean shift (average of all observers for a given image set) were less than 1.5 and 2.5 mm were calculated. Standard errors of measurement for the intra- and interobserver uncertainty (SEMintra and SEMinter) for the individual and teams were calculated. The data showed that there was very little difference between individual therapists and teams. At isocenter, 80%-90% of all reported shifts agreed with the daily average within 1.5 mm, showing consistency in the ways both individuals and teams interpret the images (SEMinter approximately 1 mm). This dropped to 65% for the supraclavicular point (SEMinter approximately 1.5 mm). Uncertainties increased for larger setup errors. In conclusion, image-guided patient positioning allows head-and-neck patients to be controlled within 3-4 mm. This is similar to the setup uncertainties found for most head-and-neck patients, but may provide some improvement for the subset of patients with larger setup uncertainties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17821978     DOI: 10.1118/1.2747050

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  3 in total

1.  Method comparison of automated matching software-assisted cone-beam CT and stereoscopic kilovoltage x-ray positional verification image-guided radiation therapy for head and neck cancer: a prospective analysis.

Authors:  Clifton D Fuller; Todd J Scarbrough; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Coen R N Rasch; Mehee Choi; Joe Y Ting; Samuel J Wang; Niko Papanikolaou; David I Rosenthal
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Normal tissue doses from MV image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) using orthogonal MV and MV-CBCT.

Authors:  Yuting Li; Tucker Netherton; Paige L Nitsch; Peter A Balter; Song Gao; Ann H Klopp; Laurence E Court
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-03-03       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Voluntary breath-holding for breast cancer radiotherapy is consistent and stable.

Authors:  Ruth Colgan; Matthew James; Frederick R Bartlett; Anna M Kirby; Ellen M Donovan
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 3.039

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.