PURPOSE: The imaging application Auto Beam Hold (ABH) allows for the online analysis of 2-dimensional kV images acquired during treatment. ABH can automatically detect fiducial markers and initiate a beam interrupt. In this study, we investigate the practical use and results of this intrafraction monitoring tool for patients with prostate cancer who have implanted gold seeds treated with a RapidArc technique. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 105 patients were included. For setup, the seeds were lined up using 2 orthogonal 2-dimensional kV images. After the setup procedure, ABH was applied at an interval of 3 seconds. The software requires a maximum-allowed deviation to be defined for each seed, which is referred to as a deviation limit (DL). Online, the ABH application evaluates the position of the seeds and indicates for each seed whether or not it exceeds the DL. Patients were divided in 3 groups. For the first group ABH was used with the DL at 6 mm, which corresponds to the planning target volume (PTV) margin. For the second group, the DL was set at 5 mm with an unchanged PTV margin of 6 mm. For the third group, the PTV margin was reduced to 5 mm with a DL of 5 mm. Offline, we performed an analysis of the number of beam stops and resulting re-setups. RESULTS: ABH initiated a beam interrupt 223 times (13%) during a total of 1736 sessions. By decreasing the DL from 6 mm to 5 mm, the amount of workload for re-setups increased from 6% (group 1) to 14% (groups 2 and 3). Re-setup, 3-dimensional shifts larger than the PTV margin were found in 44%, 35%, and 45% for groups 1,2, and 3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intrafraction imaging of prostate position during treatment using automatic detection of implanted gold seeds was successfully implemented. PTV margins were safely reduced from 6mm to 5mm without a substantial increase in workload.
PURPOSE: The imaging application Auto Beam Hold (ABH) allows for the online analysis of 2-dimensional kV images acquired during treatment. ABH can automatically detect fiducial markers and initiate a beam interrupt. In this study, we investigate the practical use and results of this intrafraction monitoring tool for patients with prostate cancer who have implanted gold seeds treated with a RapidArc technique. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 105 patients were included. For setup, the seeds were lined up using 2 orthogonal 2-dimensional kV images. After the setup procedure, ABH was applied at an interval of 3 seconds. The software requires a maximum-allowed deviation to be defined for each seed, which is referred to as a deviation limit (DL). Online, the ABH application evaluates the position of the seeds and indicates for each seed whether or not it exceeds the DL. Patients were divided in 3 groups. For the first group ABH was used with the DL at 6 mm, which corresponds to the planning target volume (PTV) margin. For the second group, the DL was set at 5 mm with an unchanged PTV margin of 6 mm. For the third group, the PTV margin was reduced to 5 mm with a DL of 5 mm. Offline, we performed an analysis of the number of beam stops and resulting re-setups. RESULTS:ABH initiated a beam interrupt 223 times (13%) during a total of 1736 sessions. By decreasing the DL from 6 mm to 5 mm, the amount of workload for re-setups increased from 6% (group 1) to 14% (groups 2 and 3). Re-setup, 3-dimensional shifts larger than the PTV margin were found in 44%, 35%, and 45% for groups 1,2, and 3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intrafraction imaging of prostate position during treatment using automatic detection of implanted gold seeds was successfully implemented. PTV margins were safely reduced from 6mm to 5mm without a substantial increase in workload.
Authors: Shyama U Tetar; Anna M E Bruynzeel; Lisa Verweij; Omar Bohoudi; Berend J Slotman; Tezontl Rosario; Miguel A Palacios; Frank J Lagerwaard Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-07-03
Authors: Chavelli M Kensen; Tomas M Janssen; Anja Betgen; Lisa Wiersema; Femke P Peters; Peter Remeijer; Corrie A M Marijnen; Uulke A van der Heide Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 4.309
Authors: Mark C Korpics; Michelle Rokni; Michael Degnan; Bulent Aydogan; Stanley L Liauw; Gage Redler Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-01-24 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Charis Kontaxis; Daan M de Muinck Keizer; Linda G W Kerkmeijer; Thomas Willigenburg; Mariska D den Hartogh; Jochem R N van der Voort van Zyp; Eline N de Groot-van Breugel; Jochem Hes; Bas W Raaymakers; Jan J W Lagendijk; Hans C J de Boer Journal: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-07-13
Authors: Casper Gammelmark Muurholm; Thomas Ravkilde; Robin De Roover; Simon Skouboe; Rune Hansen; Wouter Crijns; Tom Depuydt; Per R Poulsen Journal: Med Phys Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 4.506