Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cancer Radiother ; 28(3): 229-235, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38871604

RESUMO

PURPOSE: The main objective of this study was to assess inter- and intrafraction errors for two patient immobilisation devices in the context of lung stereotactic body radiation therapy: a vacuum cushion and a simple arm support. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients who were treated with lung stereotactic body radiation therapy in supine position with arms above their head were included in the study. Ten patients were setup in a vacuum cushion (Bluebag™, Elekta) and ten other patients with a simple arm support (Posirest™, Civco). A pretreatment four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography and a post-treatment three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography were acquired to compare positioning and immobilisation accuracy. Based on a rigid registration with the planning computed tomography on the spine at the target level, translational and rotational errors were reported. RESULTS: The median number of fractions per treatment was 5 (range: 3-10). Mean interfraction errors based on 112 four-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographies were similar for both setups with deviations less than or equal to 1.3mm in lateral and vertical direction and 1.2° in roll and yaw. For longitudinal translational errors, mean interfraction errors were 0.7mm with vacuum cushion and -3.9mm with arm support. Based on 111 three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographies, mean lateral, longitudinal and vertical intrafraction errors were -0.1mm, -0.2mm and 0.0mm respectively (SD: 1.0, 1.2 and 1.0mm respectively) for the patients setup with vacuum cushion, and mean vertical, longitudinal and lateral intrafraction errors were -0.3mm, -0.7mm and 0.1mm respectively (SD: 2.3, 1.8 and 1.4mm respectively) for the patients setup with arm support. Intrafraction errors means were not statistically different between both positions but standard deviations were statistically larger with arm support. CONCLUSION: The results of our study showed similar inter and intrafraction mean deviations between both positioning but a large variability in intrafraction observed with arm support suggested a more accurate immobilization with vacuum cushion.


Assuntos
Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico , Imobilização , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Posicionamento do Paciente , Radiocirurgia , Humanos , Radiocirurgia/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/radioterapia , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Pulmonares/cirurgia , Imobilização/métodos , Imobilização/instrumentação , Estudos Prospectivos , Idoso , Feminino , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico/métodos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Erros de Configuração em Radioterapia/prevenção & controle , Fracionamento da Dose de Radiação , Decúbito Dorsal , Tomografia Computadorizada Quadridimensional/métodos , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Vácuo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA