PURPOSE: To evaluate the overall positioning accuracy of image-guided intracranial radiosurgery across multiple linear accelerator platforms. METHODS: A computed tomography scan with a slice thickness of 1.0 mm was acquired of an anthropomorphic head phantom in a BrainLAB U-frame mask. The phantom was embedded with three 5-mm diameter tungsten ball bearings, simulating a central, a left, and an anterior cranial lesion. The ball bearings were positioned to radiation isocenter under ExacTrac X-ray or cone-beam computed tomography image guidance on 3 Linacs: (1) ExacTrac X-ray localization on a Novalis Tx; (2) cone-beam computed tomography localization on the Novalis Tx; (3) cone-beam computed tomography localization on a TrueBeam; and (4) cone-beam computed tomography localization on an Edge. Each ball bearing was positioned 5 times to the radiation isocenter with different initial setup error following the 4 image guidance procedures on the 3 Linacs, and the mean (µ) and one standard deviation (σ) of the residual error were compared. RESULTS: Averaged overall 3 ball bearing locations, the vector length of the residual setup error in mm (µ ± σ) was 0.6 ± 0.2, 1.0 ± 0.5, 0.2 ± 0.1, and 0.3 ± 0.1 on ExacTrac X-ray localization on a Novalis Tx, cone-beam computed tomography localization on the Novalis Tx, cone-beam computed tomography localization on a TrueBeam, and cone-beam computed tomography localization on an Edge, with their range in mm being 0.4 to 1.1, 0.4 to 1.9, 0.1 to 0.5, and 0.2 to 0.6, respectively. The congruence between imaging and radiation isocenters in mm was 0.6 ± 0.1, 0.7 ± 0.1, 0.3 ± 0.1, and 0.2 ± 0.1, for the 4 systems, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting accuracy comparable to frame-based stereotactic radiosurgery can be achieved with image-guided intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery treatment.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the overall positioning accuracy of image-guided intracranial radiosurgery across multiple linear accelerator platforms. METHODS: A computed tomography scan with a slice thickness of 1.0 mm was acquired of an anthropomorphic head phantom in a BrainLAB U-frame mask. The phantom was embedded with three 5-mm diameter tungsten ball bearings, simulating a central, a left, and an anterior cranial lesion. The ball bearings were positioned to radiation isocenter under ExacTrac X-ray or cone-beam computed tomography image guidance on 3 Linacs: (1) ExacTrac X-ray localization on a Novalis Tx; (2) cone-beam computed tomography localization on the Novalis Tx; (3) cone-beam computed tomography localization on a TrueBeam; and (4) cone-beam computed tomography localization on an Edge. Each ball bearing was positioned 5 times to the radiation isocenter with different initial setup error following the 4 image guidance procedures on the 3 Linacs, and the mean (µ) and one standard deviation (σ) of the residual error were compared. RESULTS: Averaged overall 3 ball bearing locations, the vector length of the residual setup error in mm (µ ± σ) was 0.6 ± 0.2, 1.0 ± 0.5, 0.2 ± 0.1, and 0.3 ± 0.1 on ExacTrac X-ray localization on a Novalis Tx, cone-beam computed tomography localization on the Novalis Tx, cone-beam computed tomography localization on a TrueBeam, and cone-beam computed tomography localization on an Edge, with their range in mm being 0.4 to 1.1, 0.4 to 1.9, 0.1 to 0.5, and 0.2 to 0.6, respectively. The congruence between imaging and radiation isocenters in mm was 0.6 ± 0.1, 0.7 ± 0.1, 0.3 ± 0.1, and 0.2 ± 0.1, for the 4 systems, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting accuracy comparable to frame-based stereotactic radiosurgery can be achieved with image-guided intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery treatment.
Authors: Vikren Sarkar; Adam Paxton; Martin W Szegedi; Hui Zhao; Long Huang; Geoff Nelson; Yu-Huei Jessica Huang; Fanchi Su; Prema Rassiah-Szegedi; Bill J Salter Journal: J Radiosurg SBRT Date: 2018
Authors: Ning Wen; Joshua Kim; Anthony Doemer; Carri Glide-Hurst; Indrin J Chetty; Chang Liu; Eric Laugeman; Ilma Xhaferllari; Akila Kumarasiri; James Victoria; Maria Bellon; Steve Kalkanis; M Salim Siddiqui; Benjamin Movsas Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2018-05-25 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Jun Li; Wenyin Shi; David Andrews; Maria Werner-Wasik; Bo Lu; Yan Yu; Adam Dicker; Haisong Liu Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-12-14