Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 113(1): 214-227, 2022 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35074434

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate whether liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning can be harmonized across different treatment planning systems, delivery techniques, and institutions by using a specific prescription method and to minimize the knowledge gap concerning intersystem and interuser differences. We provide best practice guidelines for all used techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multiparametric specification of target dose (gross target volume [GTV]D50%, GTVD0.1cc, GTVV90%, planning target volume [PTV]V70%) with a prescription dose of GTVD50% = 3 × 20 Gy and organ-at-risk (OAR) limits were distributed with computed tomography and structure sets from 3 patients with liver metastases. Thirty-five institutions provided 132 treatment plans using different irradiation techniques. These plans were first analyzed for target and OAR doses. Four different renormalization methods were performed (PTVDmin, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, PTVDmax). The resulting 660 treatments plans were evaluated regarding target doses to study the effect of dose renormalization to different prescription methods. A relative scoring system was used for comparisons. RESULTS: GTVD50% prescription can be performed in all systems. Treatment plan harmonization was overall successful, with standard deviations for Dmax, PTVD98%, GTVD98%, and PTVDmean of 1.6, 3.3, 1.9, and 1.5 Gy, respectively. Primary analysis showed 55 major deviations from clinical goals in 132 plans, whereas in only <20% of deviations GTV/PTV dose was traded for meeting OAR limits. GTVD50% prescription produced the smallest deviation from target planning objectives and between techniques, followed by the PTVDmax, PTVD98%, PTVD2%, and PTVDmin prescription. Deviations were significant for all combinations but for the PTVDmax prescription compared with GTVD50% and PTVD98%. Based on the various dose prescription methods, all systems significantly differed from each other, whereas GTVD50% and PTVD98% prescription showed the least difference between the systems. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the feasibility of harmonizing liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans across different treatment planning systems and delivery techniques when a sufficient set of clinical goals is given.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Hepáticas , Radiocirurgia , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada , Benchmarking , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Hepáticas/radioterapia , Radiocirurgia/métodos , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos
2.
Radiat Oncol ; 14(1): 231, 2019 Dec 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31852497

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The present study investigates the intrafractional accuracy of a frameless thermoplastic mask used for head immobilization during stereotactic radiotherapy. Non-invasive masks cannot completely prohibit head movements. Previous studies attempted to estimate the magnitude of intrafractional inaccuracy by means of pre- and postfractional measurements only. However, this might not be sufficient to accurately map also intrafractional head movements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intrafractional deviation of mask-fixed head positions was measured in five patients during a total of 94 fractions by means of close-meshed repeated ExacTrac measurements (every 1.4 min) conducted during the entire treatment session. A median of six (range: 4 to 11) measurements were recorded per fraction, delivering a dataset of 453 measurements. RESULTS: Random errors (SD) for the x, y and z axes were 0.27 mm, 0.29 mm and 0.29 mm, respectively. Median 3D deviation was 0.29 mm. Of all 3D intrafractional motions, 5.5 and 0.4% exceeded 1 mm and 2 mm, respectively. A moderate correlation between treatment duration and mean 3D displacement was determined (rs = 0.45). Mean 3D deviation increased from 0.21 mm (SD = 0.26 mm) in the first 2 min to a maximum of 0.53 mm (SD = 0.31 mm) after 10 min of treatment time. CONCLUSION: Pre- and post-treatment measurement is not sufficient to adequately determine the range of intrafractional head motion. Thermoplastic masks provide both reliable interfractional and intrafractional immobilization for image-guided stereotactic hypofractionated radiotherapy. Greater positioning accuracy may be obtained by reducing treatment duration (< 6 min) and applying intrafractional correction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03896555, Registered 01 April 2019 - retrospectively registered.


Assuntos
Movimentos da Cabeça , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/cirurgia , Imobilização/instrumentação , Posicionamento do Paciente/instrumentação , Imagens de Fantasmas , Radiocirurgia/instrumentação , Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador/métodos , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/patologia , Humanos , Processamento de Imagem Assistida por Computador/métodos , Imobilização/métodos , Máscaras , Movimento , Órgãos em Risco/efeitos da radiação , Posicionamento do Paciente/métodos , Radiocirurgia/métodos , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...