Literature DB >> 8436530

Interactive use of on-line portal imaging in pelvic radiation.

W De Neve1, F Van den Heuvel, M Coghe, D Verellen, M De Beukeleer, A Roelstraete, P De Roover, L Thon, G Storme.   

Abstract

We have evaluated a fluoroscopic on-line portal imaging system in routine clinical radiotherapy, involving the treatment of 566 pelvic fields on 13 patients. The image was typically generated by delivering a radiation dose of 6-8 cGy. Comparison between portal image and simulator film was done by eye and all visible errors were corrected before continuing irradiation. If possible, these corrections were performed from outside the treatment room by moving the patient couch by remote control or by changing collimator parameters. Adjustments were performed on 289/530 (54.5%) evaluable fields or 229/278 (82.4%) evaluable patient set-ups. The lateral couch position was most frequently adjusted (n = 254). The absolute values of the adjustments were 6.8 mm mean (SD 6.6 mm) with a maximum of 40 mm. All absolute values of adjustments exceeding 25 mm were recorded in one patient and those exceeding 15 mm were observed in two patients. Both patients were obese females. Adjustments exceeding 5 mm were observed in all 13 patients. Related to the use of on-line portal imaging, treatment time was increased by a median of 36.5% (mean 45.8%; SD 42.1%). The range was 7.7 to 442%. The fraction of the total treatment time to perform corrections was 22.7% median (mean: 26.0; SD: 11.8%). Statistically significant systematic in-plane errors were found in 7/13 patients. A systematic error was detected on the lateral position of the field in five patients. In one patient a systematic error of the longitudinal field position and in one patient a rotational error was detected. For adjustments in the lateral direction the present method does not allow to detect lateral shifts of less than 2 mm. For adjustments in the longitudinal direction the sensitivity could not be estimated but the available data suggest that 80% of errors < or = 5 mm were not adjusted. In obese patients, random errors may be surprisingly large.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8436530     DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(93)90075-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  6 in total

1.  Beam rate influence on dose distribution and fluence map in IMRT dynamic technique.

Authors:  Krzysztof Slosarek; Aleksandra Grządziel; Wojciech Osewski; Lukasz Dolla; Barbara Bekman; Borislava Petrovic
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2012-02-10

2.  Guide to clinical use of electronic portal imaging.

Authors:  M G Herman; J J Kruse; C R Hagness
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Theoretical foundation for real-time prostate localization using an inductively coupled transmitter and a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometer system.

Authors:  John E McGary
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Accuracy and reproducibility of conformal radiotherapy using data from a randomised controlled trial of conformal radiotherapy in prostate cancer (MRC RT01, ISRCTN47772397).

Authors:  S Stanley; S Griffiths; M R Sydes; A R Moore; I Syndikus; D P Dearnaley
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 4.126

5.  A comparison of computer-controlled versus manual on-line patient setup adjustment.

Authors:  Kristy K Brock; Daniel L McShan; James M Balter
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Performance evaluation of an automated image registration algorithm using an integrated kilovoltage imaging and guidance system.

Authors:  Timothy Fox; Calvin Huntzinger; Peter Johnstone; Tomi Ogunleye; Eric Elder
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.