Assessment of spatial uncertainty in computed tomography-based Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery process with automated positioning system.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we assessed the geometric accuracy of an automated positioning system in Gamma Knife (GK) surgery. Specifically, we looked at the total spatial uncertainty over the entire treatment range of GK stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) procedures in both the GK model C and the Perfexion (PFX). METHODS: An originally-developed phantom and a radiochromic film were used for obtaining actual dose distributions. The phantom, with inserted films on different axial planes (z = 60, 75, 100, 125, 140 mm), sagittal planes (x = 60, 75, 100, 125, 140 mm), and coronal planes (y = 60, 75, 100, 125, 140 mm), was placed on a Leksell skull frame. Computed tomography (CT) was then performed with a stereotactic localizer box attached to the frame, and dose planning was made using the Leksell GammaPlan treatment planning system. The phantom finally received beam delivery using a single shot of a 4-mm collimator helmet. The discrepancy between the planned shot position and the irradiated center position was evaluated by a dedicated film analysis software. RESULTS: The total uncertainty of CT-based GK SRS was less than 1 mm for almost all measured points over the stereotactic space in both the model C and the PFX. In addition, the geometric accuracy of the automated positioning system was estimated to be less than 0.1 mm and equal to 0.5 mm in the central and peripheral areas, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed that the total spatial uncertainties of both the GK model C and the PFX are acceptable for clinical use.

[Assessment of overall spatial accuracy in image guided stereotactic body radiotherapy using a spine registration method].

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for lung and liver tumors is always performed under image guidance, a technique used to confirm the accuracy of setup positioning by fusing planning digitally reconstructed radiographs with X-ray, fluoroscopic, or computed tomography (CT) images, using bony structures, tumor shadows, or metallic markers as landmarks. The Japanese SBRT guidelines state that bony spinal structures should be used as the main landmarks for patient setup. In this study, we used the Novalis system as a linear accelerator for SBRT of lung and liver tumors. The current study compared the differences between spine registration and target registration and calculated total spatial accuracy including setup uncertainty derived from our image registration results and the geometric uncertainty of the Novalis system. We were able to evaluate clearly whether overall spatial accuracy is achieved within a setup margin (SM) for planning target volume (PTV) in treatment planning. After being granted approval by the Hospital and University Ethics Committee, we retrospectively analyzed eleven patients with lung tumor and seven patients with liver tumor. The results showed the total spatial accuracy to be within a tolerable range for SM of treatment planning. We therefore regard our method to be suitable for image fusion involving 2-dimensional X-ray images during the treatment planning stage of SBRT for lung and liver tumors.

Assessment of spatial uncertainties in the radiotherapy process with the Novalis system.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new version of the ExacTrac X-ray (ETX) system with statistical analysis retrospectively in order to determine the tolerance of systematic components of spatial uncertainties with the Novalis system. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three factors of geometrical accuracy related to the ETX system were evaluated by phantom studies. First, location dependency of the detection ability of the infrared system was evaluated. Second, accuracy of the automated calculation by the image fusion algorithm in the patient registration software was evaluated. Third, deviation of the coordinate scale between the ETX isocenter and the mechanical isocenter was evaluated. From the values of these examinations and clinical experiences, the total spatial uncertainty with the Novalis system was evaluated. RESULTS: As to the location dependency of the detection ability of the infrared system, the detection errors between the actual position and the detected position were 1% in translation shift and 0.1 degrees in rotational angle, respectively. As to the accuracy of patient verification software, the repeatability and the coincidence of the calculation value by image fusion were good when the contrast of the X-ray image was high. The deviation of coordinates between the ETX isocenter and the mechanical isocenter was 0.313 +/- 0.024 mm, in a suitable procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The spatial uncertainty will be less than 2 mm when suitable treatment planning, optimal patient setup, and daily quality assurance for the Novalis system are achieved in the routine workload.