PURPOSE: We assessed the accuracy and safety of spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using helical tomotherapy (HT) via evaluating intrafractional patient movement. METHODS: From July 2009 to April 2011, 22 patients with spine lesions received SBRT using HT, with a total of 61 fractions. To evaluate intrafractional movement, we compared post-treatment megavoltage CT scans with planning CT images and obtained translational [lateral (X), craniocaudal (Y), anterioposterior (Z)] offsets and total displacements (R). We analyzed the correlation of intrafractional motion with patient and treatment characteristics. We also analyzed dosimetric change to the target and spinal cord, resulting from intrafractional movement, in the three patients that showed the greatest R values. RESULTS: Intrafractional movements were 0.7 ± 0.6 mm (X), 1.1 ± 0.7 mm (Y), 0.9 ± 0.6 mm (Z), and 1.8 ± 0.6 mm (R). This movement did not correlate with age, pain score, treatment time, or treatment site. Only patients with lower BMIs have a tendency to move more during treatment. Patient immobilization using wrapping form (thermoplastic mask and BodyFIX(®) system) resulted in less lateral movement and total displacement than others (0.498 ± 0.409 vs. 1.138 ± 0.637 mm, P < 0.001 for X; and 1.638 ± 0.691 vs. 1.976 ± 0.495 mm, P = 0.032 for R). However, this intrafractional motion did not affect the dose delivery to the target and spinal cord. CONCLUSION: SBRT using HT can be a safe treatment modality for spine metastasis with enhanced targeting accuracy.
PURPOSE: We assessed the accuracy and safety of spine stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) using helical tomotherapy (HT) via evaluating intrafractional patient movement. METHODS: From July 2009 to April 2011, 22 patients with spine lesions received SBRT using HT, with a total of 61 fractions. To evaluate intrafractional movement, we compared post-treatment megavoltage CT scans with planning CT images and obtained translational [lateral (X), craniocaudal (Y), anterioposterior (Z)] offsets and total displacements (R). We analyzed the correlation of intrafractional motion with patient and treatment characteristics. We also analyzed dosimetric change to the target and spinal cord, resulting from intrafractional movement, in the three patients that showed the greatest R values. RESULTS: Intrafractional movements were 0.7 ± 0.6 mm (X), 1.1 ± 0.7 mm (Y), 0.9 ± 0.6 mm (Z), and 1.8 ± 0.6 mm (R). This movement did not correlate with age, pain score, treatment time, or treatment site. Only patients with lower BMIs have a tendency to move more during treatment. Patient immobilization using wrapping form (thermoplastic mask and BodyFIX(®) system) resulted in less lateral movement and total displacement than others (0.498 ± 0.409 vs. 1.138 ± 0.637 mm, P < 0.001 for X; and 1.638 ± 0.691 vs. 1.976 ± 0.495 mm, P = 0.032 for R). However, this intrafractional motion did not affect the dose delivery to the target and spinal cord. CONCLUSION: SBRT using HT can be a safe treatment modality for spine metastasis with enhanced targeting accuracy.
Authors: Samuel Ryu; Fang Fang Yin; Jack Rock; Jingeng Zhu; Archie Chu; Eduard Kagan; Lisa Rogers; Munther Ajlouni; Mark Rosenblum; Jae Ho Kim Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-04-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sanford L Meeks; Joseph F Harmon; Katja M Langen; Twyla R Willoughby; Thomas H Wagner; Patrick A Kupelian Journal: Med Phys Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Christoph Fürweger; Christian Drexler; Markus Kufeld; Alexander Muacevic; Berndt Wowra; Alexander Schlaefer Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: T R Mackie; T Holmes; S Swerdloff; P Reckwerdt; J O Deasy; J Yang; B Paliwal; T Kinsella Journal: Med Phys Date: 1993 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Mischa S Hoogeman; Joost J Nuyttens; Peter C Levendag; Ben J M Heijmen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-11-08 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Harald Rief; Sonja Katayama; Thomas Bruckner; Stefan Rieken; Tilman Bostel; Robert Förster; Ingmar Schlampp; Robert Wolf; Jürgen Debus; Florian Sterzing Journal: Trials Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Tanja Sprave; Stefan Ezechiel Welte; Thomas Bruckner; Robert Förster; Tilman Bostel; Ingmar Schlampp; Nils Henrik Nicolay; Jürgen Debus; Harald Rief Journal: Trials Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Eva Meyerhof; Tanja Sprave; Stefan Ezechiel Welte; Nils H Nicolay; Robert Förster; Tilman Bostel; Thomas Bruckner; Ingmar Schlampp; Jürgen Debus; Harald Rief Journal: Trials Date: 2017-03-03 Impact factor: 2.279