Literature DB >> 22534137

Interfraction rotation of the prostate as evaluated by kilovoltage X-ray fiducial marker imaging in intensity-modulated radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer.

Reinhold Graf1, Dirk Boehmer, Volker Budach, Peter Wust.   

Abstract

To quantify the daily rotation of the prostate during a radiotherapy course using stereoscopic kilovoltage (kV) x-ray imaging and intraprostatic fiducials for localization and positioning correction. From 2005 to 2009, radio-opaque fiducial markers were inserted into 38 patients via perineum into the prostate. The ExacTrac/Novalis Body X-ray 6-day image acquisition system (ET/NB; BrainLab AG, Feldkirchen, Germany) was used to determine and correct the target position. During the first period in 10 patients we recorded all rotation errors but used only Y (table) for correction. For the next 28 patients we used for correction all rotational coordinates, i.e., in addition Z (superior-inferior [SI] or roll) and X (left-right [LR] or tilt/pitch) according to the fiducial marker position by use of the Robotic Tilt Module and Varian Exact Couch. Rotation correction was applied above a threshold of 1° displacement. The systematic and random errors were specified. Overall, 993 software-assisted rotational corrections were performed. The interfraction rotation errors of the prostate as assessed from the radiodense surrogate markers around the three axes Y, Z, and X were on average 0.09, -0.52, and -0.01° with standard deviations of 2.01, 2.30, and 3.95°, respectively. The systematic uncertainty per patient for prostate rotation was estimated with 2.30, 1.56, and 4.13° and the mean random components with 1.81, 2.02, and 3.09°. The largest rotational errors occurred around the X-axis (pitch), but without preferring a certain orientation. Although the error around Z (roll) can be compensated on average by a transformation with 4 coordinates, a significant error around X remains and advocates the full correction with 6 coordinates. Rotational errors as assessed via daily stereoscopic online imaging are significant and dominate around X. Rotation possibly degrades the dosimetric coverage of the target volume and may require suitable strategies for correction.
Copyright © 2012 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22534137     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2012.02.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  12 in total

Review 1.  Evolution of advanced technologies in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Nicholas G Zaorsky; Amy S Harrison; Edouard J Trabulsi; Leonard G Gomella; Timothy N Showalter; Mark D Hurwitz; Adam P Dicker; Robert B Den
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Comparison between manual and automatic image registration in image-guided radiation therapy using megavoltage cone-beam computed tomography with an imaging beam line for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Takashi Hashido; Shinya Nakasone; Mari Fukao; Seiichi Ota; Shinichi Inoue
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2018-09-21

3.  Image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer: Analysis of interfractional errors and acute toxicity.

Authors:  Volker Rudat; A Nour; M Hammoud; A Alaradi; A Mohammed
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  Dosimetric impact of organ at risk daily variation during prostate stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.

Authors:  Lynsey Devlin; David Dodds; Azmat Sadozye; Philip McLoone; Nicholas MacLeod; Carolynn Lamb; Suzanne Currie; Stefanie Thomson; Aileen Duffton
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-01-30       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Prostate rotation detected from implanted markers can affect dose coverage and cannot be simply dismissed.

Authors:  Qingyang Shang; Lawrence J Sheplan Olsen; Kevin Stephans; Rahul Tendulkar; Ping Xia
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Positioning error and expanding margins of planning target volume with kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Gang Wang; Wen-Ling Wang; Yi-Qun Liu; Hong-Min Dong; Yin-Xiang Hu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Comparison between electromagnetic transponders and radiographic imaging for prostate localization: A pelvic phantom study with rotations and translations.

Authors:  Daniel G Hamilton; Dean P McKenzie; Anne E Perkins
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  The potential failure risk of the cone-beam computed tomography-based planning target volume margin definition for prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on a prospective single-institutional hybrid analysis.

Authors:  Katsumi Hirose; Mariko Sato; Yoshiomi Hatayama; Hideo Kawaguchi; Fumio Komai; Makoto Sohma; Hideki Obara; Masashi Suzuki; Mitsuki Tanaka; Ichitaro Fujioka; Koji Ichise; Yoshihiro Takai; Masahiko Aoki
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 3.481

Review 9.  ACR Appropriateness Criteria for external beam radiation therapy treatment planning for clinically localized prostate cancer, part II of II.

Authors:  Nicholas G Zaorsky; Timothy N Showalter; Gary A Ezzell; Paul L Nguyen; Dean G Assimos; Anthony V D'Amico; Alexander R Gottschalk; Gary S Gustafson; Sameer R Keole; Stanley L Liauw; Shane Lloyd; Patrick W McLaughlin; Benjamin Movsas; Bradley R Prestidge; Al V Taira; Neha Vapiwala; Brian J Davis
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-03-20

10.  A Noninvasive Body Setup Method for Radiotherapy by Using a Multimodal Image Fusion Technique.

Authors:  Jie Zhang; Ying Chen; Yunxia Chen; Chenchen Wang; Jing Cai; Kaiyue Chu; Jianhua Jin; Yun Ge; Xiaolin Huang; Yue Guan; Weifeng Li
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-11-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.