3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Computed tomography localization of radiation treatment delivery versus conventional localization with bony landmarks

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A computed tomography (CT) scanner was installed in the linear accelerator room (Primatom) at Morristown. Since June 2000, we have been providing prostate, lung, and liver cancer patients with fusion of CT and linac radiation treatment. This paper describes our registration methods between planning and treatment CT images, and compares treatment localization by CT versus conventional localization by bony landmarks such as portal imaging. For image registration, we printed out beforehand the beam's eye view of the treatment fields. Prostate tumor volume from each Primatom CT slice was mapped on the printouts, and the necessary isocenter shift relative to the skin marks was deduced. No port film was necessary for our Primatom patients. For ten patients we generated digitally‐reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) with bone contrast from the CT scans, and deduced the required shift as the difference between the DRRs of the Primatom CT versus the planning CT This represented the best observable shift should portal imaging be employed. Shift from bony landmark significantly correlated with the Primatom CT shift. Positioning adjustment based on bony anatomy was generally in the same direction as the CT shift for individual patient, but frequently did not go far enough. Our study confirmed that prostate organ motion relative to the bones has an average length of 4.7 mm (with standard deviation of 2.7 mm), and indicated the superiority of CT versus conventional bony structure (such as portal imaging) localization.

          PACS number(s): 87.53.Kn, 87.53.–j

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Organ motion and its management.

          To compile and review data on the topic of organ motion and its management. Data were classified into three categories: (a) patient position-related organ motion, (b) interfraction organ motion, and (c) intrafraction organ motion. Data on interfraction motion of gynecological tumors, the prostate, bladder, and rectum are reviewed. Literature pertaining to the intrafraction movement of the liver, diaphragm, kidneys, pancreas, lung tumors, and prostate is compiled. Methods for managing interfraction and intrafraction organ motion in radiation therapy are also reviewed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The use of active breathing control (ABC) to reduce margin for breathing motion.

            For tumors in the thorax and abdomen, reducing the treatment margin for organ motion due to breathing reduces the volume of normal tissues that will be irradiated. A higher dose can be delivered to the target, provided that the risk of marginal misses is not increased. To ensure safe margin reduction, we investigated the feasibility of using active breathing control (ABC) to temporarily immobilize the patient's breathing. Treatment planning and delivery can then be performed at identical ABC conditions with minimal margin for breathing motion. An ABC apparatus is constructed consisting of 2 pairs of flow monitor and scissor valve, 1 each to control the inspiration and expiration paths to the patient. The patient breathes through a mouth-piece connected to the ABC apparatus. The respiratory signal is processed continuously, using a personal computer that displays the changing lung volume in real-time. After the patient's breathing pattern becomes stable, the operator activates ABC at a preselected phase in the breathing cycle. Both valves are then closed to immobilize breathing motion. Breathing motion of 12 patients were held with ABC to examine their acceptance of the procedure. The feasibility of applying ABC for treatment was tested in 5 patients by acquiring volumetric scans with a spiral computed tomography (CT) scanner during active breath-hold. Two patients had Hodgkin's disease, 2 had metastatic liver cancer, and 1 had lung cancer. Two intrafraction ABC scans were acquired at the same respiratory phase near the end of normal or deep inspiration. An additional ABC scan near the end of normal expiration was acquired for 2 patients. The ABC scans were also repeated 1 week later for a Hodgkin's patient. In 1 liver patient, ABC scans were acquired at 7 different phases of the breathing cycle to facilitate examination of the liver motion associated with ventilation. Contours of the lungs and livers were outlined when applicable. The variation of the organ positions and volumes for the different scans were quantified and compared. The ABC procedure was well tolerated in the 12 patients. When ABC was applied near the end of normal expiration, the minimal duration of active breath-hold was 15 s for 1 patient with lung cancer, and 20 s or more for all other patients. The duration was greater than 40 s for 2 patients with Hodgkin's disease when ABC was applied during deep inspiration. Scan artifacts associated with normal breathing motion were not observed in the ABC scans. The analysis of the small set of intrafraction scan data indicated that with ABC, the liver volumes were reproducible at about 1%, and lung volumes to within 6 %. The excursions of a "center of target" parameter for the livers were less than 1 mm at the same respiratory phase, but were larger than 4 mm at the extremes of the breathing cycle. The inter-fraction scan study indicated that daily setup variation contributed to the uncertainty in assessing the reproducibility of organ immobilization with ABC between treatment fractions. The results were encouraging; ABC provides a simple means to minimize breathing motion. When applied for CT scanning and treatment, the ABC procedure requires no more than standard operation of the CT scanner or the medical accelerator. The ABC scans are void of motion artifacts commonly seen on fast spiral CT scans. When acquired at different points in the breathing cycle, these ABC scans show organ motion in three-dimension (3D) that can be used to enhance treatment planning. Reproducibility of organ immobilization with ABC throughout the course of treatment must be quantified before the procedure can be applied to reduce margin for conformal treatment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Positioning errors and prostate motion during conformal prostate radiotherapy using on-line isocentre set-up verification and implanted prostate markers.

              To evaluate treatment errors from set-up and inter-fraction prostatic motion with port films and implanted prostate fiducial markers during conformal radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Errors from isocentre positioning and inter-fraction prostate motion were investigated in 13 men treated with escalated dose conformal radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. To limit the effect of inter-fraction prostate motion, patients were planned and treated with an empty rectum and a comfortably full bladder, and were instructed regarding dietary management, fluid intake and laxative use. Field placement was determined and corrected with daily on-line portal imaging. A lateral portal film was taken three times weekly over the course of therapy. From these films, random and systematic placement errors were measured by matching corresponding bony landmarks to the simulator film. Superior-inferior and anterior-posterior prostate motion was measured from the displacement of three gold pins implanted into the prostate before planning. A planning target volume (PTV) was derived to account for the measured prostate motion and field placement errors. From 272 port films the random and systematic isocentre positioning error was 2.2 mm (range 0.2-7.3 mm) and 1.4 mm (range 0.2-3.3 mm), respectively. Prostate motion was largest at the base compared to the apex. Base: anterior, standard deviation (SD) 2.9 mm; superior, SD 2.1 mm. Apex: anterior, SD 2.1 mm; superior, SD 2.1 mm. The margin of PTV required to give a 99% probability of the gland remaining within the 95% isodose line during the course of therapy is superior 5.8 mm, and inferior 5.6 mm. In the anterior and posterior direction, this margin is 7.2 mm at the base, 6.5 mm at the mid-gland and 6.0 mm at the apex. Systematic set-up errors were small using real-time isocentre placement corrections. Patient instruction to help control variation in bladder and rectal distension during therapy may explain the observed small SD for prostate motion in this group of patients. Inter-fraction prostate motion remained the largest source of treatment error, and observed motion was greatest at the gland base. In the absence of real-time pre-treatment imaging of prostate position, sequential portal films of implanted prostatic markers should improve quality assurance by confirming organ position within the treatment field over the course of therapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                funga@mskcc.org
                lisa.grimm@ahsys.org
                james.wong@ahsys.org
                Uematsu@me.ndmc.ac.jp
                Journal
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                J Appl Clin Med Phys
                10.1002/(ISSN)1526-9914
                ACM2
                Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1526-9914
                Spring 2003
                01 March 2003
                : 4
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/acm2.2003.4.issue-2 )
                : 112-119
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Medical Physics Memorial Sloan‐Kettering Cancer Center 1275 York Avenue New York New York 10021
                [ 2 ] Department of Radiation Oncology Morristown Memorial Hospital 100 Madison Avenue Morristown New Jersey 07962
                [ 3 ] Department of Radiology National Defense Medical College 3–2 Namiki Tokorozawa, Saitama 359 Japan
                Article
                ACM20112
                10.1120/jacmp.v4i2.2525
                5724476
                12777145
                8cf32dc5-a1fa-4360-9d71-61ce4807162e
                © 2003 The Authors.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 18 July 2002
                : 11 December 2002
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 1, References: 10, Pages: 8, Words: 3400
                Categories
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Radiation Oncology Physics
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                acm20112
                Spring 2003
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:5.2.5 mode:remove_FC converted:17.11.2017

                localization,computed tomography,portal imaging
                localization, computed tomography, portal imaging

                Comments

                Comment on this article