Assessment of unintended shifts during frame-based stereotactic radiosurgery using cone beam computed tomography image guidance.

PURPOSE: To investigate the frequency, magnitude and possible causes of frame-shifts that may occur between treatment planning and treatment delivery when performing Gamma Knife radiosurgery with rigid frame-based immobilization. METHODS: Differences between computed tomography (CT) framed fiducial stereotactic coordinate reference and cone beam computed tomography stereotactic coordinates after image registration were recorded for 49 frame-based GK radiosurgery cases performed using the Gamma Knife Icon. Parameters recorded include rotational shifts, translational shifts, and the GK-computed Maximum Shot Displacement (MSD) between the two stereotactic coordinate spaces. Other patient-specific parameters were collected and linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of increased displacement. RESULTS: The median values of rotational shifts were: pitch 0.14°, yaw 0.17°, and roll 0.13°. The median absolute values of translational shifts were: left-right 0.39 mm, anteroposterior 0.14 mm, and superior-inferior 0. 22 mm. The median value of MSD was 0.71 mm. Twelve cases (24.5%) had a MSD of greater than 1.0 mm. Male gender was associated with increased MSD (p = 0.013) and translational shifts (root-mean-squared value, p = 0.017). Cases with large differences between right and left sided pin lengths were also associated with increased MSD (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The use of CBCT image guidance in frame-based GK radiosurgery allows unintended frame shifts to be identified and corrected. A significant fraction (24.5%) of patients had large enough shifts to result in a MSD of greater than 1.0 mm. Male gender and eccentrically placed frames were associated with increased MSD, and particular care should be taken in these cases.

Data collection of patient outcomes: one institution's experience.

Patient- and provider-reported outcomes are recognized as important in evaluating quality of care, guiding health care policy, comparative effectiveness research, and decision-making in radiation oncology. Combining patient and provider outcome data with a detailed description of disease and therapy is the basis for these analyses. We report on the combination of technical solutions and clinical process changes at our institution that were used in the collection and dissemination of this data. This initiative has resulted in the collection of treatment data for 23 541 patients, 20 465 patients with provider-based adverse event records, and patient-reported outcome surveys submitted by 5622 patients. All of the data is made accessible using a self-service web-based tool.