Nicholas S West1, Michael J Parkes2, Christopher Snowden3, James Prentis3, Jill McKenna4, Muhammad Shahid Iqbal5, Jason Cashmore6, Christopher Walker7. 1. Department of Radiotherapy Physics, Northern Centre for Cancer Care, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. Electronic address: nick.west@nuth.nhs.uk. 2. School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. 3. Departments of Perioperative and Critical Care Medicine, Freeman Hospital, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Therapeutic Radiography, Northern Centre for Cancer Care, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Clinical Oncology, Northern Centre for Cancer Care, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom. 6. Hall Edwards Radiotherapy Group, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom. 7. Department of Radiotherapy Physics, Northern Centre for Cancer Care, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Reducing respiratory motion during the delivery of radiation therapy reduces the volume of healthy tissues irradiated and may decrease radiation-induced toxicity. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential for rapid shallow non-invasive mechanical ventilation to reduce internal anatomy motion for radiation therapy purposes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten healthy volunteers (mean age, 38 years; range, 22-54 years; 6 female and 4 male) were scanned using magnetic resonance imaging during normal breathing and at 2 ventilator-induced frequencies: 20 and 25 breaths per minute for 3 minutes. Sagittal and coronal cinematic data sets, centered over the right diaphragm, were used to measure internal motions across the lung-diaphragm interface. Repeated scans assessed reproducibility. Physiologic parameters and participant experiences were recorded to quantify tolerability and comfort. RESULTS: Physiologic observations and experience questionnaires demonstrated that rapid shallow non-invasive ventilation technique was tolerable and comfortable. Motion analysis of the lung-diaphragm interface demonstrated respiratory amplitudes and variations reduced in all subjects using rapid shallow non-invasive ventilation compared with spontaneous breathing: mean amplitude reductions of 56% and 62% for 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. The largest mean amplitude reductions were found in the posterior of the right lung; 40.0 mm during normal breathing to 15.5 mm (P < .005) and 15.2 mm (P < .005) when ventilated with 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. Motion variations also reduced with ventilation; standard deviations in the posterior lung reduced from 14.8 mm during normal respiration to 4.6 mm and 3.5 mm at 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study is the first to measure internal anatomic motion using rapid shallow mechanical ventilation to regularize and minimize respiratory motion over a period long enough to image and to deliver radiation therapy. Rapid frequency and shallow, non-invasive ventilation both generate large reductions in internal thoracic and abdominal motions, the clinical application of which could be profound-enabling dose escalation (increasing treatment efficacy) or high-dose ablative radiation therapy. Crown
PURPOSE: Reducing respiratory motion during the delivery of radiation therapy reduces the volume of healthy tissues irradiated and may decrease radiation-induced toxicity. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential for rapid shallow non-invasive mechanical ventilation to reduce internal anatomy motion for radiation therapy purposes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten healthy volunteers (mean age, 38 years; range, 22-54 years; 6 female and 4 male) were scanned using magnetic resonance imaging during normal breathing and at 2 ventilator-induced frequencies: 20 and 25 breaths per minute for 3 minutes. Sagittal and coronal cinematic data sets, centered over the right diaphragm, were used to measure internal motions across the lung-diaphragm interface. Repeated scans assessed reproducibility. Physiologic parameters and participant experiences were recorded to quantify tolerability and comfort. RESULTS: Physiologic observations and experience questionnaires demonstrated that rapid shallow non-invasive ventilation technique was tolerable and comfortable. Motion analysis of the lung-diaphragm interface demonstrated respiratory amplitudes and variations reduced in all subjects using rapid shallow non-invasive ventilation compared with spontaneous breathing: mean amplitude reductions of 56% and 62% for 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. The largest mean amplitude reductions were found in the posterior of the right lung; 40.0 mm during normal breathing to 15.5 mm (P < .005) and 15.2 mm (P < .005) when ventilated with 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. Motion variations also reduced with ventilation; standard deviations in the posterior lung reduced from 14.8 mm during normal respiration to 4.6 mm and 3.5 mm at 20 and 25 breaths per minute, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this study is the first to measure internal anatomic motion using rapid shallow mechanical ventilation to regularize and minimize respiratory motion over a period long enough to image and to deliver radiation therapy. Rapid frequency and shallow, non-invasive ventilation both generate large reductions in internal thoracic and abdominal motions, the clinical application of which could be profound-enabling dose escalation (increasing treatment efficacy) or high-dose ablative radiation therapy. Crown
Authors: Z van Kesteren; J K Veldman; M J Parkes; M F Stevens; P Balasupramaniam; J G van den Aardweg; G van Tienhoven; A Bel; I W E M van Dijk Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-05-21 Impact factor: 4.309
Authors: Michael J Parkes; James P Sheppard; Thomas Barker; Aaron M Ranasinghe; Eshan Senanayake; Thomas H Clutton-Brock; Michael P Frenneaux Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2020-01-20 Impact factor: 4.566
Authors: Michael John Parkes; Stuart Green; Jason Cashmore; Qamar Ghafoor; Thomas Clutton-Brock Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-12-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Duncan den Boer; Johannes K Veldman; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Arjan Bel; Zdenko van Kesteren Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-09-26 Impact factor: 3.481