Use of CT simulation for treatment of cervical cancer to assess the adequacy of lymph node coverage of conventional pelvic fields based on bony landmarks.

PURPOSE: To assess the adequacy of nodal coverage of "conventional" pelvic radiation fields for carcinoma of the cervix, with contoured pelvic vessels on simulation computed tomography (CT) as surrogates for lymph node location. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pelvic arteries were contoured on non-contrast-enhanced CT simulation images of 43 patients with cervix cancer, FIGO Stages I-III. Vessel contours were hidden, and conventional pelvic fields were outlined: (1) anterior/posterior fields (AP): superior border, L5-S1 interspace; inferior border, obturator foramina; lateral border, 2 centimeters lateral to pelvic brim. (2) Lateral fields (LAT): Anterior border, symphysis pubis; posterior border, S2-S3 interspace. Distances were measured between the following: (1) bifurcation of the common iliac artery and superior border, (2) external iliac artery and lateral border of the AP field, and (3) external iliac artery and anterior border of the LAT field. The distances were considered as "inadequate" if <15 mm, "adequate" if 15-20 mm, and "generous" if >20 mm. RESULTS: Superiorly, 34 patients (79.1%) had inadequate coverage. On the AP, margins were generous in 19 (44.2%), but inadequate in 9 (20.9%). On the LAT, margins were inadequate in 30 (69.8%) patients. Overall, 41 (95.4%, CI, 84.2%-99.4%) patients had at least 1 inadequate margin, the majority located superiorly. Twenty-four (55.8%; CI, 39.9%-70.9%) patients had at least 1 generous margin, the majority located laterally on the AP field. CONCLUSION: Conventional pelvic fields based on bony landmarks do not provide optimal lymph node coverage in a substantial proportion of patients and may include excess normal tissue in some. CT simulation with vessel contouring as a surrogate for lymph node localization provides more precise and individualized field delineation.

Practical implementation of failure mode and effects analysis for safety and efficiency in stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE: To improve the safety and efficiency of a new stereotactic radiosurgery program with the application of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) performed by a multidisciplinary team of health care professionals. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Representatives included physicists, therapists, dosimetrists, oncologists, and administrators. A detailed process tree was created from an initial high-level process tree to facilitate the identification of possible failure modes. Group members were asked to determine failure modes that they considered to be the highest risk before scoring failure modes. Risk priority numbers (RPNs) were determined by each group member individually and then averaged. RESULTS: A total of 99 failure modes were identified. The 5 failure modes with an RPN above 150 were further analyzed to attempt to reduce these RPNs. Only 1 of the initial items that the group presumed to be high-risk (magnetic resonance imaging laterality reversed) was ranked in these top 5 items. New process controls were put in place to reduce the severity, occurrence, and detectability scores for all of the top 5 failure modes. CONCLUSIONS: FMEA is a valuable team activity that can assist in the creation or restructuring of a quality assurance program with the aim of improved safety, quality, and efficiency. Performing the FMEA helped group members to see how they fit into the bigger picture of the program, and it served to reduce biases and preconceived notions about which elements of the program were the riskiest.

Lack of influence of intravenous contrast on head and neck IMRT dose distributions.

PURPOSE: Intravenous (i.v.) contrast at the time of CT-Simulation facilitates radiotherapy contouring, but may introduce a discrepancy between planned and delivered dose due to density variation in blood vessels. Here, the effect of physiologic and non-physiologic extremes of i.v. contrast densities on intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plans for patients with head and neck cancer was investigated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This planning study was conducted using i.v. contrast CT scans of ten patients with squamous cell cancer of the head and neck treated with IMRT. The target volumes and normal tissues, including the blood vessels of the head and neck, were contoured and IMRT plans were created according to RTOG Protocol 0022. The density within the blood vessels was then virtually altered to mimic non-contrast and extreme (bone and air) densities. The dose was then recalculated using the same IMRT plan. Plans obtained with and without density overrides were then compared. RESULTS: The change in planning target volume (PTV) coverage for plans with and without i.v. contrast was minimal. The volume of the PTVs covered by the 93% and 100% isodoses changed on average by 0.57%. The minimum dose to PTVs varied by a maximum of 0.17 Gy. The maximum point dose to critical organs changed by a maximum of 0.12 Gy (brainstem). Non-physiologic extremes of density within blood vessels also resulted in minimal changes in tumor or normal tissue dosimetry. CONCLUSION: The use of i.v. contrast at time of CT-simulation does not significantly affect dose calculation in head and neck IMRT plans.