PURPOSE: In cervical cancer patients the nodal clinical target volume (CTV, defined using the major pelvic blood vessels and enlarged lymph nodes) is assumed to move synchronously with the bony anatomy. The aim of this study was to verify this assumption by investigating the motion of the major pelvic blood vessels and enlarged lymph nodes visible in CT scans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 13 patients treated in prone position, four variable bladder-filling CT scans per patient, acquired at planning and after 40 Gy, were selected from an available dataset of 9-10 CT scans. The bladder, rectum, and the nodal-vessels structure containing the iliac vessels and all visible enlarged nodes were delineated in each selected CT scan. Two online patient setup correction protocols were simulated. The first corrected bony anatomy translations and the second corrected translations and rotations. The efficacy of each correction was calculated as the overlap between the nodal-vessels structure in the reference and repeat CT scans. The motion magnitude between delineated structures was quantified using nonrigid registration. RESULTS: Translational corrections resulted in an average overlap of 58 ± 13% and in a range of motion between 9.9 and 27.3 mm. Translational and rotational corrections significantly improved the overlap (64 ± 13%, p value = 0.007) and moderately reduced the range of motion to 7.6-23.8 mm (p value = 0.03). Bladder filling changes significantly correlated with the nodal-vessels motion (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The motion of the nodal-vessels was large, nonrigid, patient-specific, and only moderately synchronous with the bony anatomy. This study highlights the need for caution when reducing the CTV-to-PTV (PTV planning target volume) margin of the nodal CTV for highly conformal radiation techniques.
PURPOSE: In cervical cancerpatients the nodal clinical target volume (CTV, defined using the major pelvic blood vessels and enlarged lymph nodes) is assumed to move synchronously with the bony anatomy. The aim of this study was to verify this assumption by investigating the motion of the major pelvic blood vessels and enlarged lymph nodes visible in CT scans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 13 patients treated in prone position, four variable bladder-filling CT scans per patient, acquired at planning and after 40 Gy, were selected from an available dataset of 9-10 CT scans. The bladder, rectum, and the nodal-vessels structure containing the iliac vessels and all visible enlarged nodes were delineated in each selected CT scan. Two online patient setup correction protocols were simulated. The first corrected bony anatomy translations and the second corrected translations and rotations. The efficacy of each correction was calculated as the overlap between the nodal-vessels structure in the reference and repeat CT scans. The motion magnitude between delineated structures was quantified using nonrigid registration. RESULTS: Translational corrections resulted in an average overlap of 58 ± 13% and in a range of motion between 9.9 and 27.3 mm. Translational and rotational corrections significantly improved the overlap (64 ± 13%, p value = 0.007) and moderately reduced the range of motion to 7.6-23.8 mm (p value = 0.03). Bladder filling changes significantly correlated with the nodal-vessels motion (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The motion of the nodal-vessels was large, nonrigid, patient-specific, and only moderately synchronous with the bony anatomy. This study highlights the need for caution when reducing the CTV-to-PTV (PTV planning target volume) margin of the nodal CTV for highly conformal radiation techniques.
Authors: Karen Lim; William Small; Lorraine Portelance; Carien Creutzberg; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Arno Mundt; Loren K Mell; Nina Mayr; Akila Viswanathan; Anuja Jhingran; Beth Erickson; Jennifer De los Santos; David Gaffney; Catheryn Yashar; Sushil Beriwal; Aaron Wolfson; Alexandra Taylor; Walter Bosch; Issam El Naqa; Anthony Fyles Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Louise Vagner Laursen; Ulrik Vindelev Elstrøm; Anne Vestergaard; Ludvig P Muren; Jørgen Baltzer Petersen; Jacob Christian Lindegaard; Cai Grau; Kari Tanderup Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2012-09-28 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Clark J Brixey; John C Roeske; Anthony E Lujan; S Diane Yamada; Jacob Rotmensch; Arno J Mundt Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Robert Dinniwell; Philip Chan; Gregory Czarnota; Masoom A Haider; Kartik Jhaveri; Michael Jewett; Anthony Fyles; David Jaffray; Michael Milosevic Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-12-25 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sara Thörnqvist; Liv B Hysing; Andras G Zolnay; Matthias Söhn; Mischa S Hoogeman; Ludvig P Muren; Lise Bentzen; Ben J M Heijmen Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-10-31 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Peter de Boer; Agustinus J A J van de Schoot; Henrike Westerveld; Mark Smit; Marrije R Buist; Arjan Bel; Coen R N Rasch; Lukas J A Stalpers Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 3.621