PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of continuous table motion on patient breathing patterns for compensation of moving targets by a robotic treatment couch. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen volunteers were placed on a robotic treatment couch, and the couch was moved on different breathing-correlated and -uncorrelated trajectories. External abdominal breathing motion of the patients was measured using an infrared camera system. The influence of table motion on breathing range and pattern was analyzed. RESULTS: Continuous table motion was tolerated well by all test persons. Volunteers reacted differently to table motion. Four test persons showed no change of breathing range and pattern. Increased irregular breathing was observed in 4 patients; however, irregularity was not correlated with table motion. Only 4 test persons showed an increase in mean breathing amplitude of more than 2mm during motion of the couch. The mean cycle period decreased by more than 1 s for 2 test persons only. No abrupt changes in amplitude or cycle period could be observed. CONCLUSIONS: The observed small changes in breathing patterns support the application of motion compensation by a robotic treatment couch. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of continuous table motion on patient breathing patterns for compensation of moving targets by a robotic treatment couch. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifteen volunteers were placed on a robotic treatment couch, and the couch was moved on different breathing-correlated and -uncorrelated trajectories. External abdominal breathing motion of the patients was measured using an infrared camera system. The influence of table motion on breathing range and pattern was analyzed. RESULTS: Continuous table motion was tolerated well by all test persons. Volunteers reacted differently to table motion. Four test persons showed no change of breathing range and pattern. Increased irregular breathing was observed in 4 patients; however, irregularity was not correlated with table motion. Only 4 test persons showed an increase in mean breathing amplitude of more than 2mm during motion of the couch. The mean cycle period decreased by more than 1 s for 2 test persons only. No abrupt changes in amplitude or cycle period could be observed. CONCLUSIONS: The observed small changes in breathing patterns support the application of motion compensation by a robotic treatment couch. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: J Boda-Heggemann; M Guckenberger; U Ganswindt; C Belka; H Wertz; M Blessing; F Wenz; M Fuss; F Lohr Journal: Radiologe Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 0.635
Authors: Joseph E McNamara; Rajesh Regmi; D Michael Lovelock; Ellen D Yorke; Karyn A Goodman; Andreas Rimner; Hassan Mostafavi; Gig S Mageras Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 4.071