Literature DB >> 33029107

IMPACT OF THREE DIFFERENT MATCHING METHODS ON PATIENT SET-UP ERROR IN X-RAY VOLUMETRIC IMAGING FOR HEAD AND NECK CANCER.

P Mohandass1,2, D Khanna1, B Nishaanth2, C Saravanan2, Narendra Bhalla2, Abhishek Puri2, Blessy Mohandass3.   

Abstract

Impact of three different matching methods for delivery of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) in Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) on patient set-up error. As per institutional imaging protocol, 300 CBCT scans of 20 VMAT head and neck cancer patients treated with 60 Gy/30 fractions were chosen for the present study. Approved CT images of the plan were registered as a reference with the CBCT images on board. Grey-scale matching (GM), manual matching (MM), and bone matching (BM) between on-board CBCT and reference CT images were used to assess patient translation errors. Patient positioning verification was evaluated using the Clip-box registration in all three matching methods. Using the GM approach as a reference point, two additional matchings were rendered in offline mode using BM and MM. For analysis, random error (σ), systematic error (∑), maximum error (E) mean set-up error (M), mean displacement vector (R), matching time (Mt), and multiple comparisons using Post hoc Tukey's HSD test were performed. In MM, less random and systematic errors were found than in GM and BM with an insignificant difference (p > 0.05) Compared to BM and GM, the maximum error, mean set-up error, and displacement vector were marginally less in MM (p > 0.05). In MM, an increased Mt relative to BM and GM was observed (p > 0.05). Furthermore, an insignificant difference in set-up error was revealed in a multiple comparison test (p > 0.05). Any of the three matching methods can be used during CBCT to check patient translation errors for the delivery of the VMAT head and neck patients.
© 2020 Greater Poland Cancer Centre. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CBCT; Clip box; Matching methods; VMAT; head and neck cancer; set-up error

Year:  2020        PMID: 33029107      PMCID: PMC7528047          DOI: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother        ISSN: 1507-1367


  11 in total

Review 1.  Errors and margins in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Marcel van Herk
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.934

2.  Evaluation of kV cone-beam ct performance for prostate IGRT: a comparison of automatic grey-value alignment to implanted fiducial-marker alignment.

Authors:  Wenyin Shi; Jonathan G Li; Robert A Zlotecki; Anamaria Yeung; Heather Newlin; Jatinder Palta; Chihray Liu; Alexei V Chvetsov; Kenneth Olivier
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.339

3.  Cone beam CT verification for oesophageal cancer - impact of volume selected for image registration.

Authors:  Maria A Hawkins; Alexandra Aitken; Vibeke N Hansen; Helen A McNair; Diana M Tait
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 4.089

4.  First clinical experience with a multiple region of interest registration and correction method in radiotherapy of head-and-neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Suzanne van Beek; Simon van Kranen; Angelo Mencarelli; Peter Remeijer; Coen Rasch; Marcel van Herk; Jan-Jakob Sonke
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  A comparison between electronic portal imaging device and cone beam CT in radiotherapy verification of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  W C Vincent Wu; Wan Shun Leung; Shu San Kay; Hiu Ching Cheung; Yan Kit Wah
Journal:  Med Dosim       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 1.482

6.  Evaluating the accuracy of the XVI dual registration tool compared with manual soft tissue matching to localise tumour volumes for post-prostatectomy patients receiving radiotherapy.

Authors:  Amelia Campbell; Rebecca Owen; Elizabeth Brown; David Pryor; Anne Bernard; Margot Lehman
Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 1.735

7.  Set-up errors and planning target volume margins in head and neck cancer radiotherapy: a clinical study of image guidance with on-line cone-beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Francesco Dionisi; Mauro Filippo Palazzi; Francesco Bracco; Maria Grazia Brambilla; Claudia Carbonini; Diego Dario Asnaghi; Angelo Filippo Monti; Alberto Torresin
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-03-03       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Analysis of inter-fraction setup errors and organ motion by daily kilovoltage cone beam computed tomography in intensity modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Marcella Palombarini; Stefano Mengoli; Paola Fantazzini; Cecilia Cadioli; Claudio Degli Esposti; Giovanni Piero Frezza
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 3.481

9.  Set-up errors in head and neck cancer treated with IMRT technique assessed by cone-beam computed tomography: a feasible protocol.

Authors:  Durim Delishaj; Stefano Ursino; Francesco Pasqualetti; Fabrizio Matteucci; Agostino Cristaudo; Carlo Pietro Soatti; Amelia Barcellini; Fabiola Paiar
Journal:  Radiat Oncol J       Date:  2018-03-30

10.  Dosimetric impact of setup errors in head and neck cancer patients treated by image-guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Inderjit Kaur; Sheh Rawat; Parveen Ahlawat; Anjali Kakria; Gourav Gupta; Upasna Saxena; Manindra Bhushan Mishra
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun
View more
  1 in total

1.  Dosimetric Importance of the Implementation of Daily Image Guidance in Radiotherapy Practice.

Authors:  Hridya V T; D Khanna; Aswathi Raj; Sathish Padmanabhan; P Mohandass
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2022-01-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.