Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Setup error assessment based on "Sphere-Mask" Optical Positioning System: Results from a multicenter study.
Zhang, Yan; Zhou, Han; Chu, Kaiyue; Wu, Chuanfeng; Ge, Yun; Shan, Guoping; Zhou, Jundong; Cai, Jing; Jin, Jianhua; Sun, Weiyu; Chen, Ying; Huang, Xiaolin.
Afiliação
  • Zhang Y; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
  • Zhou H; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
  • Chu K; Department of Radiotherapy, Nantong Tumor Hospital, Nantong, China.
  • Wu C; Department of Radiotherapy, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou, China.
  • Ge Y; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
  • Shan G; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
  • Zhou J; Department of Radiation Physics, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China.
  • Cai J; Department of Radiotherapy, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou, China.
  • Jin J; Department of Radiotherapy, Nantong Tumor Hospital, Nantong, China.
  • Sun W; Department of Radiotherapy, Nantong Tumor Hospital, Nantong, China.
  • Chen Y; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
  • Huang X; School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Front Oncol ; 12: 918296, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36267985
Background: The setup accuracy plays an extremely important role in the local control of tumors. The purpose of this study is to verify the feasibility of "Sphere-Mask" Optical Positioning System (S-M_OPS) for fast and accurate setup. Methods: From 2016 to 2021, we used S-M_OPS to supervise 15441 fractions in 1981patients (with the cancer in intracalvarium, nasopharynx, esophagus, lung, liver, abdomen or cervix) undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and recorded the data such as registration time and mask deformation. Then, we used S-M_OPS, laser line and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for co-setup in 277 fractions, and recorded laser line-guided setup errors and S-M_OPS-guided setup errors with CBCT-guided setup result as the standard. Results: S-M_OPS supervision results: The average time for laser line-guided setup was 31.75s. 12.8% of the reference points had an average deviation of more than 2 mm and 5.2% of the reference points had an average deviation of more than 3 mm. Co-setup results: The average time for S-M_OPS-guided setup was 7.47s, and average time for CBCT-guided setup was 228.84s (including time for CBCT scan and manual verification). In the LAT (left/right), VRT (superior/inferior) and LNG (anterior/posterior) directions, laser line-guided setup errors (mean±SD) were -0.21±3.13mm, 1.02±2.76mm and 2.22±4.26mm respectively; the 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of laser line-guided setup errors were -6.35 to 5.93mm, -4.39 to 6.43mm and -6.14 to 10.58mm respectively; S-M_OPS-guided setup errors were 0.12±1.91mm, 1.02±1.81mm and -0.10±2.25mm respectively; the 95% CIs of S-M_OPS-guided setup errors were -3.86 to 3.62mm, -2.53 to 4.57mm and -4.51 to 4.31mm respectively. Conclusion: S-M_OPS can greatly improve setup accuracy and stability compared with laser line-guided setup. Furthermore, S-M_OPS can provide comparable setup accuracy to CBCT in less setup time.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Guideline Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Guideline Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article