Literature DB >> 24398111

Comparison of the effectiveness of different immobilization systems in different body regions using daily megavoltage CT in helical tomotherapy.

K-F Cheng1, V W C Wu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Effective immobilization is crucial for the accurate delivery of radiotherapy. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the commonly used immobilization systems for different body regions using megavoltage CT (MVCT).
METHODS: Daily treatment set-up data from 212 patients treated by helical tomotherapy (Accuray, Sunnyvale, CA) in 6 body regions (52 head and neck, 41 chest, 38 abdomen, 36 pelvis, 18 breast and 27 cranium) were obtained. Based on a verification tool using the pre-treatment MVCT, set-up corrections for each patient were recorded. Mean systematic and random errors of lateral, longitudinal, vertical and roll directions and three-dimensional vectors were compared between immobilization systems of each region.
RESULTS: Smaller set-up deviations were observed in the Orfit system (Orfit Industries NV, Wijnegem, Belgium) of the head and neck region, while the performance of immobilization systems for the chest, abdomen and pelvis regions was similar. Larger differences were noted in the breast group, where the prone BodyFIX® system (Medical Intelligence, Medizintechnik GmbH, Schwabmünchen, Germany) was less stable than the supine VacLok® system (CIVCO Medical Solutions, Orange City, IA).
CONCLUSION: Differences were found between the immobilization systems in the head and neck region, in which the Orfit system was relatively more effective, whereas the VacLok and BodyFIX systems performed similarly in the chest, abdomen and pelvis regions. For the breast case, the supine position with VacLok was much more stable than the prone breast technique. The results provided references for the estimation of clinical target volume-planning target volume margins. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first article on comprehensive comparisons performed in immobilization systems for main body regions that provides some practical recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24398111      PMCID: PMC4064544          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20130494

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  17 in total

1.  Prone breast radiotherapy in early-stage breast cancer: a preliminary analysis.

Authors:  A Grann; B McCormick; E S Chabner; S V Gollamudi; K D Schupak; B R Mychalczak; A S Heerdt; T E Merchant; M A Hunt
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2000-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Quantification of organ motion during conformal radiotherapy of the prostate by three dimensional image registration.

Authors:  M van Herk; A Bruce; A P Kroes; T Shouman; A Touw; J V Lebesque
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1995-12-01       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Analysis and reduction of 3D systematic and random setup errors during the simulation and treatment of lung cancer patients with CT-based external beam radiotherapy dose planning.

Authors:  H C de Boer; J R van Sörnsen de Koste; S Senan; A G Visser; B J Heijmen
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2001-03-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and linac-IMRT treatment plans for head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Xin Zhang; Jose Penagaricano; Eduardo G Moros; Peter M Corry; Yulong Yan; Vaneerat Ratanatharathorn
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 1.482

5.  Comparison of setup accuracy of three different thermoplastic masks for the treatment of brain and head and neck tumors.

Authors:  L Gilbeau; M Octave-Prignot; T Loncol; L Renard; P Scalliet; V Grégoire
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.280

6.  Estimated limits of IMRT dose escalation using varied planning target volume margins.

Authors:  Christopher C Goulet; Michael G Herman; David W Hillman; Brian J Davis
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-06-23       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  A randomized trial evaluating rigid immobilization for pelvic irradiation.

Authors:  Andrew Kneebone; Val Gebski; Nicole Hogendoorn; Sandra Turner
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  High-precision prostate cancer irradiation by clinical application of an offline patient setup verification procedure, using portal imaging.

Authors:  A Bel; P H Vos; P T Rodrigus; C L Creutzberg; A G Visser; J C Stroom; J V Lebesque
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1996-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Immobilization improves the reproducibility of patient positioning during six-field conformal radiation therapy for prostate carcinoma.

Authors:  S A Rosenthal; M Roach; B J Goldsmith; E C Doggett; B Pickett; H S Yuo; E M Soffen; R L Stern; J K Ryu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1993-11-15       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Conformal static field therapy for low volume low grade prostate cancer with rigid immobilization.

Authors:  E M Soffen; G E Hanks; C C Hwang; J C Chu
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 7.038

View more
  4 in total

1.  Comparison of set up accuracy among three common immobilisation systems for intensity modulated radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.

Authors:  Cheng-Guang Lin; Sen-Kui Xu; Wen-Yan Yao; Yu-Qi Wu; Jian-Lan Fang; Vincent W C Wu
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2016-09-01

2.  Which technique of positioning and immobilization is better for breast cancer patients in postmastectomy IMRT, single-pole or double-pole immobilization?

Authors:  Qun Xiang; Wuyun Jie; KuiKui Zhu; Qiong Wang; Jing Cheng
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Comparing Accuracy of Thermoplastic Mask versus Commercial Bra for the Immobilization of Pendulous Breast During Radiation Therapy Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Zaheeda Mulla; Omar Iskanderani; Amina Weber; Abdullah AlMohamad; Mohammed Sheikh Al-Amoodi; Shamel Soaida
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-10-14

4.  Immobilization versus no immobilization for pelvic external beam radiotherapy.

Authors:  Avinash H Udayashankar; Shibina Noorjahan; Nirmala Srikantia; K Ravindra Babu; Sandeep Muzumder
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2018-05-17
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.