Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessment of the use of different imaging and delivery techniques for cranial treatments on the Halcyon linac.
Flores-Martinez, Everardo; Cerviño, Laura I; Pawlicki, Todd; Kim, Gwe-Ya.
Afiliação
  • Flores-Martinez E; Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
  • Cerviño LI; Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
  • Pawlicki T; Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
  • Kim GY; Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 21(1): 53-61, 2020 Jan.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31738473
PURPOSE: In this work, we investigated the effect on the workflow and setup accuracy of using surface guided radiation therapy (SGRT) for patient setup, megavoltage cone beam CT (MVCBCT) or kilovoltage cone beam CT (kVCBCT) for imaging and fixed IMRT or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for treatment delivery with the Halcyon linac. METHODS: We performed a retrospective investigation of 272 treatment fractions, using three different workflows. The first and second workflows used MVCBCT and fixed IMRT for imaging and treatment delivery, and the second one also used SGRT for patient setup. The third workflow used SGRT for setup, kVCBCT for imaging and VMAT for delivery. Workflows were evaluated by comparing the number of fractions requiring repeated imaging acquisitions and the time required for setup, imaging and treatment delivery. Setup position accuracy was assessed by comparing the daily kV- or MV- CBCT with the planning CT and measuring the residual rotational errors for pitch, yaw and roll angles. RESULTS: Without the use of SGRT, the imaging fields were delivered more than once on 11.1% of the fractions, while re-imaging was necessary in 5.5% of the fractions using SGRT. The total treatment time, including setup, imaging, and delivery, for the three workflows was 531 ± 157 s, 503 ± 130 s and 457 ± 91 s, respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed when comparing the third workflow with the first two. The total residual rotational errors were 1.96 ± 1.29°, 1.28 ± 0.67° and 1.22 ± 0.76° and statistically significant differences were observed when comparing workflows with and without SGRT. CONCLUSIONS: The use of SGRT allowed for a reduction of re-imaging during patient setup and improved patient position accuracy by reducing residual rotational errors. A reduction in treatment time using kVCBCT with SGRT was observed. The most efficient workflow was the one including kVCBCT and SGRT for setup and VMAT for delivery.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador / Neoplasias Encefálicas / Imagens de Fantasmas / Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico / Posicionamento do Paciente / Erros de Configuração em Radioterapia / Radioterapia Guiada por Imagem Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Planejamento da Radioterapia Assistida por Computador / Neoplasias Encefálicas / Imagens de Fantasmas / Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico / Posicionamento do Paciente / Erros de Configuração em Radioterapia / Radioterapia Guiada por Imagem Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article